Why Riot's Dunning-Kruger explanation is absolute rubbish.

Qiyn·Jul 10, 2016·2 votes·1,335 views

The Dunning-Kruger effect states that people fail at recognizing their competency level. Or as RationalWiki puts it, "people [sic] are too stupid to know how stupid they are." When Riot applies this to League of Legends, as they often do, they are saying that we all suck at this game, and we couldn't know how much we suck. This explanation is generally used by Riot to rebut any complaints about their matchmaking and elo system.

This really bothers me. And not because Riot is telling me i suck. (That is an illogical statement in its own right, though). I don't play this game aspiring to become pro. I play this game to have fun. And i want to maximize that fun. When i call into question the matchmaking and elo system, i do it because it is not maximizing my fun.

And then, of course, i get the usual Dunning-Kruger explanation in response. So, let us assume their response were indeed true. I suck so bad, that i don't know how bad i suck at this game. Are any of my grievances incorrect now that i have accepted Riot's counter-argument? No. Let me show why.

Typical arguments usually go like this: The matchmaking system does not group me with similarly skilled players, and the elo system does not reflect my true skill. Anecdotally, this seems to be true. We seem to always find the players who amazing ad will successfully 1v5, and the players who you are amazed at just being alive! Also, bronze games can feel a lot like silver games which can feel a lot like gold games.

Now comes the Dunning-Kruger rebuttal. Riot says to the poster, "You suck, and you don't know how much you suck." Poster accepts this statement. Riot to poster, "Therefore, your argument is invalidated." Poster, "Wait, why?"

Can there be different levels of suck? Riot claims this to be true: You can be bronze level of suck, silver level of suck, or gold level of suck (some might argue for plat level of suck and diamond level of suck, but i have not experienced these myself, so i choose to leave them out). Is there evidence to support this claim? No.

Am i matched with similarly skilled players? Riot claims this to be true, as well, but this is based off their unsubstantiated claim of you being in different levels of suck. So, this too is unsubstantiated.

The Dunning-Kruger explanation does nothing to invalidate these two arguments. It is illogical to think otherwise. Stop using the Dunning-Kruger effect as a counter-argument.

29 Comments

disregardableJul 10, 20167 votes

Do you do well (let's say go 8/0 with good cs) in 100% of your games? Do you do horribly (say, 0/8 with very little cs) in 100% of your games?

Everyone has the capacity to do well and do poorly. When a person does poorly, that does not mean they are worse players than you. When they do well, that does not mean they are better players than you. These games are very circumstantial, they're basically coinflips. If you played the exact same match 10 times, it would probably go 5/5 or maybe 4/6.

If the players were ACTUALLY better or worse, they would not be at your rating, because they would not be able to have maintained their place.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

Watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7NE7apn-PA.

Your argument is invalid because you struggle with thinking logically. Don't worry though, 96% of people also think illogically.

Did i actually discuss your argument? No. This illustrates why the Dunning-Kruger effect is not a valid counter-argument.

Your counter-argument is very logical. However, it is an argument like mine. One without evidence. The Dunning-Kruger effect is not evidence. Stop using it.

redniwediSJul 10, 20162 votes

Your argument is invalid because you struggle with thinking logically.

No? You might want to watch that video again mate, because you didn't get a whole lot out of it. You just said that the argument is invalid because he struggles with thinking logically, which is quite clearly incorrect.

You didn't even draw the right percentage from the video. What the video actually said is 96% of people struggle when facing abstract logic problems. The video also said that invalid reasoning is not always incorrect reasoning. Invalid, when used as a logic term, is not even remotely close to being a synonym for incorrect.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

You are having an issue with me making an invalid argument (and i admit it to be illogical in the next paragraph).

Yet you do not have the same issue for Riot making an invalid argument.

redniwediSJul 10, 20161 votes

Read what I said again. I would easily have a problem with Riot making an invalid argument if they were actually making an argument.

They are not making an argument.

EDIT: Wrong comment chain for the read again thing. I covered this elsewhere in the thread.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

Claim: There are minor issues with LoL matchmaking, for the most part the problem is all in our heads.

Evidence:

The first of these is that when we take a look across all games, most players actually require about 150 to 300 games to reach their true matchmaking rating.
The Dunning-Kruger Effect sees players rate their own abilities far above their actual skill level.
Negativity bias, meanwhile, simply means that the worst experiences in LoL - the colossal losses, the match-curtailing and the trolling - loom largest in the memory, creating the impression of an imbalanced system where one isn’t.

This is an argument. A poorly made one, but an argument nonetheless.

redniwediSJul 10, 20161 votes

It is not an argument.

Normal people do not speak in a way that always follows the rules of logic. Normal people have irrational discussions. Normal people say things that have no meaning, and believe that things with contrary evidence are true.

The Rioter who made that statement was not making a logical statement. They were making a public statement that carries opinion and feeling more than hard fact.

Now, you're not saying the Rioter who wrote that is having a heated exchange of words with someone in that quoted FAQ, are you? No, of course you are not. The word "argument" has multiple meanings, depending on context.

The word "statement" is the same way. In logic terms it has one meaning, and outside of logic terms it has another. You are using the wrong form of the word.

It is not an logical argument. There was no logical statement made. There have been no logical claims that must be supported by evidence.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

No, this is not correct. That statement, and those said on their official FAQ (https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/201752954-Matchmaking-Guide) do not intend to carry opinion and feeling. Feeling is very personal. "Finally, both the Dunning-Kruger effect and negativity bias also play a role here in shaping players’ impressions of their matchmaking experiences overall," does not suggest this is stated from feeling.

Opinion is a poorly chosen word. It may or may not be fact based. So, if you are trying to make the claim that Riot's opinions are not-fact based, then why would they assert they have "not-inconsiderable data and analysis?"

It isn't fact either. Perhaps we could use the Dunning-Kruger effect against them? I have always known that high elo players vastly overstate how much better they are than i. Just as meaningless as what Riot is spewing out.

redniwediSJul 11, 20161 votes

To be fair your much older link from earlier did present the quote differently than it is plainly laid out on their support page.

Also to be fair you don't really know much about logic, and even failed to fully understand the video you presented in this thread. You claimed 96% of people think illogically when really the video said nothing of the sort.

The video said 96% of people have difficulty with abstract logic problems, and 28% have difficulty with non-abstract logic problems. If you really want to stretch the numbers to fit what you're talking about you should have used the 28%, not the 96%. That is of course ignoring that having difficulty with a logic problem does not show you think irrationally, it simply shows that your brain innately makes the jump to an irrational outcome.

If you can't even bother to take the time to fully understand your own sources why exactly do you expect anyone to take you seriously? Why do you expect anyone to listen to you when you cannot separate logical rules from the way a company writes out an FAQ?

The FAQ simply states they know the Dunning-Kruger effect and Negativity Bias play a major part is what people see as problems with matchmaking. Not only that but the FAQ, particularly the part we're talking about, is old. It does not necessarily reflect any current problems matchmaking might have.

So please, before you try to continue this any further go back and carefully watch what that video has to say, from start to end. Once you understand that try and wrap your head around the fact that people talking, be it an official statement from a company or just some random person you meet, DO NOT NECESSARILY FOLLOW LOGICAL RULES.

It's a Frequently Asked Questions page, not an argument. At the very least go look up the definition for a logical argument, maybe that will be enough to show you how wrong you are here.

Until then have a good day, I'm done listening to a logic 101 student.

A LiberalJul 10, 20165 votes

Someone took intro to critical thinking over the summer

redniwediSJul 10, 20164 votes

Would you mind linking to where you (or whoever) complained about matchmaking and they responded with the dunning-kruger effect?

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

http://www.pcgamesn.com/leagueoflegends/riot-talk-lol-matchmaking-and-elo-hell-most-players-rate-their-matchmaking-about-150-points-higher-reality

I cannot find some of their actual posts (but they do exist). This is an article that quotes Riot's Dunning-Kruger argument.

redniwediSJul 10, 20164 votes

After reading how Riot put it I have to say I agree with them. They are not insulting anyone, they are simply stating what they think is going on based on their numbers and what they see from their players.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

It is evidence-less. You can agree with them, that is fine. But it is a non-argument being used as a counter-argument. That is my problem. Riot is being extremely illogical to do this. That one video (the reason why i am interested in this) clearly supports my point. Most people are not logical. That is not an excuse, however.

redniwediSJul 10, 20163 votes

Not sure if you noticed but they were not providing evidence. You saying it's evidence-less carries no weight because their goal was not to provide evidence.

They were talking and explaining what they think and why. They could easily provide evidence, and I would rather like if they did, but you cannot fault someone for having a bad argument when they are not presenting an argument in the first place.

You are the one being illogical here, not them.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

What you say does not make sense.

From the article: "Not so, say Riot: though there are minor issues with LoL matchmaking, for the most part the problem is all in our heads."

This is an argument.

Crazy ChatterJul 10, 20161 votes

{quoted}

What you say does not make sense.

From the article: "Not so, say Riot: though there are minor issues with LoL matchmaking, for the most part the problem is all in our heads."

This is an argument.

It is quite true tho. Although there might be trolls and whatnot, most of the people you play with are usually around your skill level.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

How do you know this?

redniwediSJul 10, 20162 votes

What I said makes perfect sense, it simply disagrees with what you think.

If they were attempting to provide evidence they would have done so. What they did was make a public statement as part of an FAQ, which is not to be confused with a logical statement that follows the rules that surround claims.

Crazy ChatterJul 10, 20161 votes

What's sadder is how you try to explain bad rank with the fact that it's illogical. In all your games, you feed more than you get kills. Doesn't this just show you that you belong where you are? Even the ones you win, you have more deaths than kills. And your cs is not the best at all. So ya, get over it. The first step to getting better is accepting that you are bad, which you clearly don't do. It's all in your history, man. When you lose, you just gotta accept that you suck. You can't blame your team cause they usually do better than you. Just deal with the fact that you are not as good as you think.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

Where did i say that i don't belong in my elo?

Crazy ChatterJul 10, 20161 votes

He basically is a guy who cannot accept the fact that he is bad and he tries to act smart about it and blame riot. Besides, you really can't blame anything else because you need to get better if you want to rise. In almost all your recent games, you were the one weak link on your team that fed the most. It might be hard, but deal with it. Life ain't fair. Some people will never get better. If you truly wish to, practice then. Don't blame riot for your problems. I personally think you're the one explaining yourself with Dunning-Kruger because you fail to recognize you are not as good as you think you are. If you do wish to improve, you might be able to get better, but like this, you'll stay where you are. Basically, don't blame others for your misfortune.

redniwediSJul 10, 20161 votes

I play this game to have fun. And i want to maximize that fun. When i call into question the matchmaking and elo system, i do it because it is not maximizing my fun.

This quote from his main post seems to disagree.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

If you didn't read my argument, or could not understand it, can you please excuse yourself from this discussion?

Crazy ChatterJul 10, 20161 votes

{quoted}

Am i matched with similarly skilled players? Riot claims this to be true, as well, but this is based off their unsubstantiated claim of you being in different levels of suck. So, this too is unsubstantiated.

Here. You basically state that riot's ranking system has no real scale of skill and it's based on if you are bad or not. However, in reality, take like skill rating systems like OW, the good players usually keep on winning until they find someone as good as them while the bad players lose til they reach their level of skill. The thing is the system is only unsubstantiated at first. After a season or so, there is basically levels of skills set for each league, so you really can't complain that you don't belong where you are cause they grade me by how bad they suck because that's all hypothetical.

QiynJul 10, 20161 votes

What you have written is hard to decipher, but i will try my best.

First, you are saying that my argument is very personal. But it isn't. I assure you of that. The argument i am making is that Riot's use of the Dunning-Kruger effect as evidence to support the claim that that their matchmaking and ranking system is overall successful is rubbish (hint: it's the title). You clearly don't understand this.

Second, you make a reference to a skill-based rating system in OW. However, you fail to admit that Riot's systems claim to match you and rank you based on skill. That it being an unsubstantiated claim is the crux of my argument. Where does the Dunning-Kruger effect fall into this? It shouldn't. Yet, Riot seems to use it all the time.

Buff Jax pleaseJul 10, 20161 votes

Why do people still complain about ranking system and matchmaking in Season 6? Its so easy to climb with all the changes. No more LP clamping (most of these kids dont even remember have 95 LP at Silver I and getting 3 LP for a win the next game ), promo helper, dynamic boost...it is basically impossible to take the game a tiny bit serious and not climb.

redniwediSJul 10, 20161 votes

Read what he said. He's not talking about climbing.