Welcome to /r/science!
You may see more removed comments in this thread than you are used to seeing elsewhere on reddit. On /r/science we have strict comment rules designed to keep the discussion on topic and about the posted study and related research. This means that comments that attempt to confirm/deny the research with personal anecdotes, jokes, memes, or other off-topic or low-effort comments are likely to be removed.
Because it can be frustrating to type out a comment only to have it removed or to come to a thread looking for discussion and see lots of removed comments, please take time to review our [comment rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules
) before posting.
If you're looking for a place to have a more relaxed discussion of science-related breakthroughs and news, check out our sister subreddit /r/EverythingScience.
Below is the abstract from the paper published in the journal *Political Psychology* to help foster discussion. The paper can be seen here: [Partisanship, Political Knowledge, and the Dunning‐Kruger Effect](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/pops.12490
>A widely cited finding in social psychology holds that individuals with low levels of competence will judge themselves to be higher achieving than they really are. In the present study, I examine how the so‐called “Dunning‐Kruger effect” conditions citizens' perceptions of political knowledgeability. While low performers on a political knowledge task are expected to engage in overconfident self‐placement and self‐assessment when reflecting on their performance, I also expect the increased salience of partisan identities to exacerbate this phenomenon due to the effects of directional motivated reasoning. Survey experimental results confirm the Dunning‐Kruger effect in the realm of political knowledge. They also show that individuals with moderately low political expertise rate themselves as increasingly politically knowledgeable when partisan identities are made salient. This below‐average group is also likely to rely on partisan source cues to evaluate the political knowledge of peers. In a concluding section, I comment on the meaning of these findings for contemporary debates about rational ignorance, motivated reasoning, and political polarization.
Generally, this applies to everything. The more you think you know about a subject, the more you realize you don't know, and then the less you claim you know. The exception would be things that are fashionable to be ignorant of for one reason or another.