The Dunning–Kruger Effect of Bullshit: Why the Worst Detectors Think They’re the Best
FRIDAY, September 12, 2025.
Here’s the joke: the people worst at spotting bullshit are the ones most convinced they’re brilliant at it.
That’s not cynicism—it’s cognitive science, confirmed by a 2025 study in Thinking & Reasoning (Čavojová, Šrol, & Brezina, 2025).
What Is bullshit?
In psychology, bullshit isn’t just a swear word. It actually has a very specific definition.
Bullshit is any communication designed to impress or persuade without concern for truth (Frankfurt, 2005).
Philosopher G.A. Cohen (2002) added that true bullshit is “unclarifiable”—it sounds profound but evaporates when you try to pin it down.
Think of lines like:
“Imagination is inside exponential space-time events.” (nonsense)
“A river cuts through rock, not because of its power but its persistence.” (sense)
Spotting the difference is bullshit detection. And it’s harder than it looks.
The Slovak Study on Pseudo-Profound Nonsense
Researchers in Slovakia tested over a thousand adults between 18 and 70. Participants saw a mix of motivational quotes and pseudo-profound nonsense statements, a method pioneered by Gordon Pennycook and colleagues (2015). The task: decide whether each was “profound” or not.
Then came the twist. Participants had to estimate how well they performed and how others would perform. This revealed metacognitive blind spots:
The worst detectors thought they were outstanding.
The best detectors underrated themselves.
Ignorance strutted. Competence doubted itself.
The Dunning–Kruger Effect in Bullshit Detection
This pattern echoes the famous Dunning–Kruger effect (Kruger & Dunning, 1999). Across domains—logic, grammar, humor—the least skilled consistently think they’re the most skilled.
Bullshit detection joins the list. Those least able to tell sense from nonsense are the most confident in their immunity to it. The skilled, meanwhile, hesitate.
Personality Traits: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Bullshitting
The Slovak team didn’t stop at detection. They also measured how often participants admitted to bullshitting and which personality traits predicted it.
Persuasive Bullshit (to impress or influence) was tied to lower detection skills.
Evasive Bullshit (to dodge questions or hide ignorance) was linked to lower self-esteem.
Narcissists thought they were excellent bullshit detectors. They weren’t.
Machiavellians admitted to bullshitting often—but they were sharper detectors. Predators know their own tricks.
Self-esteem inflated confidence across the board, but it didn’t improve accuracy.
Why People Believe Pseudo-Profound Nonsense
Why do people fall for pseudo-profound nonsense in the first place?
Pennycook et al. (2015) showed that people low in analytic thinking are more likely to nod along.
The rhythm, mysticism, and vagueness mimic the form of wisdom, triggering a little spark of recognition.
Confidence also protects the ego. Overestimating your detection ability may be less about arrogance than about self-preservation. It feels better to believe you’re savvy, even if you’re not.
Bullshit in Politics
Political slogans are prime examples of pseudo-profound language:
“Change we can believe in.”
“Make America great again.”
“Strong and stable leadership.”
They’re grammatically clean, semantically empty, and almost impossible to disprove.
The voters least able to see through them are often the most confident they can. Politicians, meanwhile, are rewarded precisely for this kind of linguistic fog.
Bullshit in Corporate Culture
Corporate mission statements are bureaucratic cousins of political slogans:
“Driving synergistic solutions for tomorrow’s challenges.”
“Unlocking innovation through cross-platform alignment.”
Everyone knows they’re vague. Everyone pretends they’re profound. However, for many, pointing it out in a meeting is a certain career suicide, so the cycle continues.
Bullshit in Influencer Culture
Social media has turned pseudo-profound nonsense into an industry. Influencers churn out lines like:
“Your frequency attracts your destiny.”
“The energy you seek is already inside you.”
They sound wise for about ten seconds. Then they’re gone—except the likes and shares remain. The people least able to detect the emptiness are the most confident they’re too smart to be fooled.
Why Bullshit Detection Matters
This research shows why pseudo-profound nonsense thrives in modern culture. It flatters the producers, who keep making it. It flatters the consumers, who keep sharing it.
Cognitive Blind Spots: inflate confidence in the least skilled.
Narcissism: fuels both production and overestimation.
Machiavellians: exploit the weakness strategically.
And none of us are fully immune. If bullshit didn’t feel good, it wouldn’t spread. The real defense isn’t smugness—it’s humility, skepticism, and the willingness to admit when you’ve been fooled.
Final thoughts
So yeah, the world runs on confident nonsense. Manufactured by narcissists. Consumed by the gullible. Rewarded by the system.
But spotting bullshit is harder than it looks, and resisting it is harder still.
We all nod along sometimes, just to belong. The real skill isn’t pretending you’re immune. That’s a compelling trap.
It’s staying curious—and humble enough to admit the occasions when the bullshit got you, too.
Be Well Stay Kind, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Čavojová, V., Šrol, J., & Brezina, I. (2025). Bullshit detection and metacognitive awareness: The interplay of cognitive factors, self-esteem, and dark traits. Thinking & Reasoning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2025.XXXXXX
Kruger, J., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121
Cohen, G. A. (2002). Deeper into bullshit. In S. Buss & L. Overton (Eds.), Contemporary philosophy in focus: Frankfurt (pp. 321–339). Cambridge University Press.
Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On bullshit. Princeton University Press.
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(6), 549–563. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500004762
Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2016). Is the cognitive reflection test a measure of both reflection and intuition? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, e202. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15000250