The basic effect Dunning-Kruger is about is real and apparent everywhere. The specific formulation as stated from that pair may have some errors but throwing away the idea due to poor science isn’t smart.
To establish the Dunning-Kruger effect is an artifact of research design, not human thinking, my colleagues and I showed it can be produced using randomly generated data.
First, we created 1,154 fictional people and randomly assigned them both a test score and a self-assessment ranking compared with their peers.
So, the experiment with completely fake data disproves Dunning-Kruger? How is this science?