Journal of Marketing Education

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kennedy, E. J.
Right arrow Articles by Plumlee, E. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 24, No. 3, 243-252 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0273475302238047
© 2002 SAGE Publications

Blissful Ignorance: The Problem of Unrecognized Incompetence and Academic Performance

Ellen J. Kennedy

Leigh Lawton

Department of Marketing at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota

E. Leroy Plumlee

Department of Management at Western Washington University, Bellingham, Washington

The skills that develop competence in a particular area are often the same skills needed to evaluate competence in that area. When people are unable to judge their own achievement, they are in a double bind; they have neither a particular skill nor the cognitive ability to realize their own level of incompetence. If students are unaware of their poor performance on tests, they are unlikely to realize their limitations. Correspondingly, the high performers may not recognize their ability to be successful. This study tests students’ self-recognized competence by having them estimate the grade they expected to receive on a test immediately following its completion. Poorer students significantly overestimated their performance; better students underestimated their performance. Poorer students became better estimators over time, while there was no similar improvement in better students’ self-assessments.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Marketing EducationHome page
D. E. Clayson
Performance Overconfidence: Metacognitive Effects or Misplaced Student Expectations?
Journal of Marketing Education, August 1, 2005; 27(2): 122 - 129.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Marketing EducationHome page
F. Jaramillo and P. E. Spector
The Effect of Action Orientation on the Academic Performance of Undergraduate Marketing Majors
Journal of Marketing Education, December 1, 2004; 26(3): 250 - 260.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Marketing EducationHome page
C. Tomkovick
Ten Anchor Points for Teaching Principles of Marketing
Journal of Marketing Education, August 1, 2004; 26(2): 109 - 115.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Marketing EducationHome page
W. B. Wilhelm
The Relative Influence of Published Teaching Evaluations and Other Instructor Attributes on Course Choice
Journal of Marketing Education, April 1, 2004; 26(1): 17 - 30.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Marketing EducationHome page
M. R. Young, B. R. Klemz, and J. W. Murphy
Enhancing Learning Outcomes: The Effects of Instructional Technology, Learning Styles, Instructional Methods, and Student Behavior
Journal of Marketing Education, August 1, 2003; 25(2): 130 - 142.
[Abstract] [PDF]