After McArthur Wheeler attempted to rob a bank in the middle of the day assuming that covering his face with lemon juice would make him invisible to security cameras, Kruger and Dunning became curious about whether incompetent individuals did not have power. metacognitive skills necessary to assess their own competence, allowing them to reach the conclusion that they are a conclusion when there is evidence to the contrary. Kruger and Dunning designed four experiments based on humor, logical reasoning and grammar to test whether the incompetent would overestimate what he did. they were capable of it as well as their results on various tests; if they had lower metacognitive skills, making them unable to recognize the skills of others; whether they were unable to accurately compare themselves to proficients due to this lack of metacognition; and finally, whether they were able to recognize their skills once they were competent themselves. In the first of four studies, a 30-item questionnaire was created with an amalgamation of jokes from various sources. The questionnaire was then evaluated by eight professional comedians who rated how funny they were on an 11-point scale (11 being very funny, 1 meaning not funny at all). 65 Cornell University undergraduates then responded to the questionnaire and were asked to rate how funny each joke was. same scale. They were then asked to rate themselves on “their ability to recognize what was funny.” The independent variable of this experiment is the questionnaire, while the dependent variable was the students' humor ratings. In the second study, they used a 20-item logical reasoning test developed from the LSAT test preparation guide (independent variable). However, this time, students were asked not only to evaluate their own abilities, but also how their ...... middle of paper ...... from observation. Although the study focused on the incompetent, there was slight mention of the highly qualified. Often, competent people would lower their scores, assuming they were closer to average than they actually were. This phenomenon was attributed to the false consensus effect, as they increased their own rating after seeing the scores of others. However, what I found interesting was that it was still just over six percentile points, which they said their analysis couldn't explain. The results of this study are very applicable to my life, given that I overestimate my position in a class until I receive my first test score. After having access to all the information (what was the average score of the class compared to my score), I find that I recalibrate and my predictions become more and more accurate as I take more tests..