#Metacognition

A new scientific study has shed light on a persistent challenge faced by those experiencing anxiety and depression: the tendency to underestimate their own abilities even when objective evidence shows they are correct. The research, published in the esteemed journal Nature Communications, suggests that while anxious and depressed individuals perform as well as their peers, they struggle to internalize moments of success, leaving them prone to chronic underconfidence. This discovery could have significant implications for mental health awareness and treatment approaches in Thailand, where stigma and underdiagnosis of mental health issues remain widespread.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect is a psychological phenomenon where people with limited knowledge or skill in a particular area often overestimate their own abilities, while those who are more competent may actually underestimate themselves. This effect, first identified by researchers at Cornell University in 1999, has become a widely discussed topic in psychology, workplace training, and even daily Thai culture, as it sheds light on why some individuals appear inexplicably confident about topics they barely understand, while experts may downplay their own expertise [thestandard.co], [themomentum.co], [thaipublica.org].

A recent study has unveiled that individuals with lower self-awareness, particularly those unable to accurately gauge the correctness of their decisions, exhibit stronger brain reactions to morally charged political issues. Published in the journal Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, the research indicates that moral judgments activate brain regions involved in emotional and cognitive control, drawing attention to the neurological underpinnings of why certain political beliefs are perceived as non-negotiable.

In a world where political polarization seems to intensify by the day, these findings are particularly significant. The study, led by Jean Decety of the University of Chicago, explores the role of moral conviction in political decision-making. It reveals that when people hold moralized beliefs about political issues, they not only decide more swiftly but rely heavily on emotional brain responses. This phenomenon is more pronounced in individuals who struggle with metacognitive sensitivity—the ability to discern right from wrong judgments.