Implications of the Dunning-Kruger Effect: Finding Balance between Subjective and Objective Assessment in Debriefing Professional Development

Background: The ability to debrief is considered an essential clinical and simulation teaching skill because of the deep learning cultivated. Regulatory bodies identify the need for debriefing training and professional development followed by formative and summative assessment. Method: The Debriefing for Meaningful Learning Evaluation Scale (DMLES) is a behaviorally anchored rating scale developed to assess 20 behaviors aligned with Debriefing for Meaningful Learning (DML). Participants from five baccalaureate pre–licensure nursing programs were recruited to receive DML training, then facilitate and record a debriefing for subjective and objective assessment using the DMLES. Results: A total of 52 debriefers submitted 81 recorded debriefings. DMLES subjective ratings at two time points were higher than that of expert raters of the same debriefings demonstrating statistically significant differences between subjective and objective mean scores. Conclusions: The difference between subjective and objective scores demonstrated the Dunning-Kruger Effect (DKE), a subjective overestimation of skill performance when compared to objective assessment. The potential for DKE is an important consideration for determining assessment methods.