Cover not available
Article published In:
Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 37:1 (2024) ► pp.27–56

El efecto Dunning-Kruger en la autoevaluación del español como L2

Diferencias entre jueces y hablantes en la evaluación de la comprensibilidad, el acento extranjero y la fluidez

ORCID logo | New York University in Madrid
El presente experimento analiza las divergencias entre la autoevaluación que un grupo de 40 hablantes de español como L2 emite sobre su grado de comprensibilidad, acento extranjero y fluidez, y las evaluaciones que recibe por parte de dos grupos de jueces: 109 No expertos sin experiencia en la enseñanza y 42 Expertos o profesores de español como L2. El propósito del experimento es analizar las diferencias entre estas evaluaciones considerando los grados de desempeño de los hablantes, ya que diversos estudios han demostrado que los participantes con peor competencia tienden a sobrevalorar su habilidad, mientras que aquellos situados en lo alto de la escala tienden a subestimarla (Kruger & Dunning, 1999). Este efecto, conocido como «Dunning-Kruger», resulta relevante para conocer hasta qué punto la autoevaluación de estas tres dimensiones por parte de aprendientes de español se corresponde con la evaluación de los interlocutores nativos con los que ellos interactúan habitualmente dentro y fuera del aula. Los resultados muestran que, efectivamente, los hablantes con peor desempeño se sobrevaloran y los que fueron mejor valorados se infravaloran, aunque la experiencia de los jueces resulta relevante a la hora de marcar la significatividad estadística de las diferencias y los tamaños del efecto.
Keywords: efecto Dunning-Kruger, autoevaluación, comprensibilidad, acento extranjero, fluidez, jueces, español como L2
Article outline
  • 1.Introducción
  • 2.Método
    • 2.1Participantes
      • 2.1.1Hablantes
      • 2.1.2Evaluadores
    • 2.2Procedimiento
      • 2.2.1Obtención de las muestras
      • 2.2.2Evaluación de las muestras
  • 3.Resultados
    • 3.1Aclaración sobre el análisis de las evaluaciones
    • 3.2Diferencias entre las puntuaciones de evaluadores y hablantes
    • 3.3Relaciones entre las puntuaciones de evaluadores y hablantes
    • 3.4Análisis de las variables de contexto de aprendizaje y de percepción sobre la tarea realizada y su nivel de español
  • 4.Discusión
    • 4.1Divergencias entre la autoevaluación y la evaluación
    • 4.2Relaciones entre la autoevaluación y la evaluación
  • 5.Conclusión e implicaciones para la enseñanza
  • Notas
  • Referencias bibliográficas

Article language: Spanish

Published online: 17 November 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.21023.san
References (59)
Referencias bibliográficas
Aqueveque, C. (2018). Ignorant experts and erudite novices: Exploring the Dunning-Kruger effect in wine consumers. Food Quality and Preference, 65 1, 181–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Babaii, E., Taghaddomi, S. y Pashmforoosh, R. (2016). Speaking self-assessment: Mismatches between learners’ and teachers’ criteria. Language Testing, 33 (3), 411–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brantmeier, C., Vanderplank, R. y Strube, M. (2012). What about me? Individual self-assessment by skill and level of language instruction. System, 40 (1), 144–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burson, K. A., Larrick, R. P. y Klayman, J. (2006). Skilled or unskilled, but still unaware of it: How perceptions of difficulty drive miscalibration in relative comparisons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (1), 60–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Camerer, C. y Lovallo, D. (1999). Overconfidence and excess entry: An experimental approach. The American Economic Review, 89 (1), 306–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carter, T. J. y Dunning, D. (2008). Faulty self-assessment: Why evaluating one’s own competence is an intrinsically difficult task. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2 (1), 346–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., Goodwin, J. y Griner, B. (2010). Teaching pronunciation. A course book and reference guide. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Consejo de Europa (2018). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment companion volume with new descriptors. Consejo de Europa. [URL]
Critcher, C. R. y Dunning, D. (2009). How chronic self-views influence (and mislead) self-assessments of task performance: Self-views shape bottom-up experiences with the task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97 (6), 931–945. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Saint Léger, D. (2009). Self-assessment of speaking skills and participation in a foreign language class. Foreign Language Annals, 42 (1), 158–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M. y Munro, M. J. (2009). Comprehensibility as a Factor in Listener Interaction Preferences: Implications for the Workplace. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66 (2), 181–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derwing, T. M., Munro, M. J. y Thomson, R. I. (2008). A longitudinal study of ESL learners’ fluency and comprehensibility development. Applied Linguistics, 29 (3), 359–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dlaska, A. y Krekeler, C. (2008). Self-assessment of pronunciation. System, 36 (4), 506–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunning, D., Heath, C. y Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5 (3), 69–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J. y Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12 (3), 83–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrlinger, J. y Dunning, D. (2003). How chronic self-views influence (and potentially mislead) estimates of performance. Attitudes and Social Cognition, 84 (1), 5–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrlinger, J., Johnson, K., Banner, M., Dunning, D. y Kruger, J. (2008). Why the unskilled are unaware: Further explorations of (absent) self-insight among the incompetent. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105 (1), 98–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feld, J., Sauermann, J. y de Grip, A. (2017). Estimating the relationship between skill and overconfidence. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 68 1, 18–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferraro, P. J. (2010). Know thyself: Competence and self-awareness. Atlantic Economic Journal, 38 (2), 183–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foote, J. (2010). Second language learners’ perceptions of their own recorded speech. PMC Working Paper Series, 10 (2), 3–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foote, J. A., Trofimovich, P., Collins, L. y Soler Urzúa, F. (2016). Pronunciation teaching practices in communicative second language classes. The Language Learning Journal, 44(2), 181–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foster, N. L., Was, C. A., Dunlosky, J. y Isaacson, R. M. (2017). Even after thirteen class exams, students are still overconfident: The role of memory for past exam performance in student predictions. Metacognition and Learning, 12 (1), 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Freund, B., Colgrove, L. A., Burke, B. L. y Mcleod, R. (2005). Self-rated driving performance among elderly drivers referred for driving evaluation. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37 (4), 613–618. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, S., Moore, K., Steel, G. y Mckinnon, A. (2017). Computers in human behavior The Dunning-Kruger effect in a workplace computing setting. Computers in Human Behavior, 72 1, 589–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D. D. y Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92 (1), 160–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Händel, M. y Dresel, M. (2018). Confidence in performance judgment accuracy: The unskilled and unaware effect revisited. Metacognition and Learning, 13 (3), 265–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haun, D. E., Zeringue, A., Leach, A. y Foley, A. (2000). Assessing the competence of specimen-processing personnel. Laboratory Medicine, 31 (11), 633–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, K. D., Hopkins, B. R. y Glass, G. V. (1996). Basic statistics for the behavioural sciences (3rd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Huhta, A., Kallio, H., Ohranen, S. y Ullakonoja, R. (2020). Fluency in language assessment. En P. Lintunen, M. Mutta, y P. Peltonen (Eds.), Fluency in L2 learning and use (pp. 129–145). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Instituto Cervantes (2020). El español en el mundo. Anuario del Instituto Cervantes 2020. Bala Perdida Editorial, Instituto Cervantes. [URL]
Kruger, J. y Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77 (6), 1121–1134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lappin-Fortin, K. y Rye, B. J. (2014). The use of pre-/posttest and self -assessment tools in a French pronunciation course. Foreign Language Annals, 47 (2), 300–320. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levis, J. (2020). Revisiting the intelligibility and nativeness principles. Journal of Second Language Pronunciation, 6 (3), 310–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindsey, B. A. y Nagel, M. L. (2015). Do students know what they know? Exploring the accuracy of students’ self-assessments. Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research, 11 (2), 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ma, W. y Winke, P. (2019). Self-assessment: How reliable is it in assessing oral proficiency over time? Foreign Language Annals, 52 (1), 66–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, P. D., Noels, K. A. y Clément, R. (1997). Biases in self-ratings of second language proficiency: The role of language anxiety. Language Learning, 47 (2), 265–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mehrens, W. A. y Lehmann, I. J. (1991). Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology (4th ed.). Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
Moore, D. S. y Notz, W. I. (2009). Statistics. Concepts and controversies (7th ed.). W. H. Freeman & Company.Google Scholar
Munro, M. J. y Derwing, T. M. (1995). Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 45 (1), 73–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, M. G. (2016). Methodological choices in rating speech samples. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38 (03), 587–605. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osle, Á. (2019). Estado de la enseñanza de la pronunciación en la clase ELE: situación actual en la escuela secundaria británica. RedELE: Revista Electrónica de Didáctica ELE, 311, 1–11.Google Scholar
Pellegrino Aveni, V. A. (2005). Study abroad and second language use: Constructing the self. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Préfontaine, Y. (2013). Perceptions of French fuency in second language speech production. Canadian Modern Language Review, 69 (3), 324–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rossiter, M. J., Derwing, T. M., Manimtim, L. G. y Thomson, R. I. (2010). Oral fluency: The neglected component in the communicative language classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 66 (4), 583–606. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saenz, G. D., Geraci, L., Miller, T. M. y Tirso, R. (2017). Metacognition in the classroom: The association between students’ exam predictions and their desired grades. Consciousness and Cognition, 51 1, 125–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Santamaría Busto, E. (2015). Percepción y evaluación de la pronunciación del español como L2. Revista Española de Lingüística, 45(1), 175–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020). Variables lingüísticas de la comprensibilidad, el acento extranjero y la fluidez en el español como L2. Diferencias en función del tipo de oyente y del grado de desempeño, Loquens, 7(2), 1–17. e075. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., Trofimovich, P., Abe, M. e In’nami, Y. (2020). Dunning-Kruger effect in second language speech learning: How does self perception align with other perception over time? Learning and Individual Differences, 79 (1), 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., Trofimovich, P. y Isaacs, T. (2017). Using listener judgments to investigate linguistic influences on L2 comprehensibility and accentedness: A validation and generalization study. Applied Linguistics, 38 (4), 439–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlösser, T., Dunning, D., Johnson, K. L. y Kruger, J. (2013). How unaware are the unskilled? Empirical tests of the “signal extraction” counterexplanation for the Dunning-Kruger effect in self-evaluation of performance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 39 1, 85–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talsma, K., Schüz, B. y Norris, K. (2019). Miscalibration of self-efficacy and academic performance: Self-efficacy ≠ self-fulfilling prophecy. Learning and Individual Differences, 69 (1), 182–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tan, H. K. K., Teo, C. T. y Ng, C. S. (2011). Variation in students’ conceptions of self-assessment and standards. Education Research International, 2011, 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomson, R. I. (2015). Fluency. En M. Reed y J. M. Levis (Eds.), The handbook of English pronunciation (pp. 209–226). John Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thorndike, R. M. (1997). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Trofimovich, P. y Isaacs, T. (2012). Disentangling accent from comprehensibility. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15 (4), 905–916. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., Isaacs, T., Kennedy, S., Saito, K. y Crowther, D. (2016). Flawed selfassessment: Investigating self- and other-perception of second language speech. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19 (1), 122–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, R. (2005). Using student-produced recordings with monolingual groups to provide effective, individualized pronunciation practice. TESOL Quarterly, 39 (3), 550–558. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yoshida, M. T. (2018). Choosing technology tools to meet pronunciation teaching and learning goals. The CATESOL Journal, 30 (1), 195–212.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, D. W. y Zumbo, B. D. (2005). Can percentiles replace raw scores in the statistical analysis of test data? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65 (4), 616–638. DOI logoGoogle Scholar