Intellectual humility has emerged as a central topic in contemporary philosophy and psychology, reflecting a renewed scholarly interest in the nature and significance of intellectual virtues. At its core, intellectual humility involves the recognition and ownership of one’s intellectual limitations—a disposition that guides how individuals approach knowledge, belief, and disagreement (Church and Samuelson 2017; Templeton Foundation 2023). This virtue is not merely about self-doubt or indecision; rather, it is characterized by a non-defensive awareness of the fallibility of one’s beliefs and an openness to revising those beliefs in light of new evidence or compelling counterarguments (Porter et al. 2021).

Recent integrative frameworks have sought to clarify the conceptual boundaries of intellectual humility, distinguishing it from related constructs such as open-mindedness and agreeableness. Porter and colleagues (2021), synthesizing findings across sixteen measurement scales, argue that the defining feature of intellectual humility is an awareness of personal intellectual limitations. Their research further delineates two key dimensions: first, the intrapersonal dimension, which concerns the recognition of one’s own fallibility and the willingness to question personal beliefs; and second, the interpersonal dimension, which involves engaging respectfully with differing perspectives and being receptive to intellectual challenge. These dimensions are operationalized in widely used self-report instruments, which assess tendencies such as admitting ignorance, welcoming alternative viewpoints, and accepting the possibility of error (Leary et al. 2017; Porter et al. 2021).

The philosophical literature underscores that intellectual humility is not reducible to mere cognitive modesty or lack of confidence. Instead, it is a virtue that balances epistemic ambition with epistemic restraint (Church and Samuelson 2017). This balance enables individuals to pursue knowledge vigorously while remaining vigilant against the epistemic vices of arrogance and dogmatism. Importantly, intellectual humility is associated with a suite of positive outcomes, including greater intellectual curiosity, persistence in the face of failure, and improved capacity for constructive disagreement (Porter et al. 2021). These findings suggest that intellectual humility is not only a personal virtue but also a social one, facilitating more open and productive discourse in both academic and everyday contexts.

Intellectual humility is best understood as a multidimensional virtue that encompasses both self-reflective and social components. It requires individuals to recognize the limits of their knowledge, remain open to revision, and engage respectfully with diverse perspectives. As research continues to refine its conceptualization and measurement, intellectual humility stands out as a virtue of increasing relevance in an era marked by epistemic polarization and complex global challenges.

Dunning-Kruger Effect

The Dunning-Kruger effect, a cognitive bias wherein individuals with limited knowledge or competence significantly overestimate their abilities, poses substantial challenges to accurate self-assessment and informed decision-making (Kruger and Dunning 1999; Davidson Institute 2025). This overconfidence, rooted in “meta-ignorance”—the inability to recognize one’s own ignorance—can foster persistent errors, resistance to learning, and even the endorsement of pseudoscientific beliefs (Vranic, Hromatko, and Tonkovic 2022). Intellectual humility, defined as the recognition and acceptance of the limits of one’s knowledge, offers a promising antidote to this bias.

Intellectual Humility May Be Effective Against Dunning-Kruger

Empirical research demonstrates that individuals who exhibit higher levels of intellectual humility are less susceptible to the Dunning-Kruger effect. Zmigrod and colleagues (2021) found that low performers tend to overestimate their abilities, but this overestimation is significantly attenuated among those who are more intellectually humble. Intellectual humility does not necessarily improve actual performance, but it does calibrate self-assessment, reducing the gap between perceived and real competence (Zmigrod et al. 2021). This calibration is crucial for fostering a realistic appraisal of one’s abilities and a willingness to seek feedback or further learning.

The mechanisms by which intellectual humility mitigates the Dunning-Kruger effect are multifaceted. First, intellectual humility encourages a growth mindset, wherein individuals view intelligence and competence as malleable rather than fixed (BBC Reel 2022). This orientation fosters openness to new information and a readiness to revise mistaken beliefs, counteracting the rigid overconfidence characteristic of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Second, intellectually humble individuals are more likely to engage in self-reflection and to solicit diverse viewpoints, which exposes them to information that challenges their assumptions and highlights knowledge gaps (Somerville 2021). Such practices not only enhance self-awareness but also promote continuous learning and adaptive expertise.

Moreover, intellectual humility cultivates an epistemic environment in which errors are viewed as opportunities for growth rather than threats to self-esteem. This shift in perspective reduces defensiveness and promotes the acknowledgment of mistakes—an essential step in correcting overestimation and bridging the gap between subjective confidence and objective knowledge (Zmigrod et al. 2021; Somerville 2021). In this way, intellectual humility serves as both a cognitive and motivational resource, enabling individuals to recognize the limits of their knowledge and to pursue improvement with curiosity rather than complacency.

Collectively, these findings underscore the value of intellectual humility as a countermeasure to the Dunning-Kruger effect. By fostering accurate self-appraisal, openness to feedback, and a commitment to lifelong learning, intellectual humility not only reduces the prevalence of overconfidence but also enhances the quality of individual and collective decision-making in complex domains.

Brandon Blankenship

Works Cited:

BBC Reel. 2022. “Why We All Fall Victim to the Dunning-Kruger Effect.” Video. BBC.

Church, Ian M., and Peter L. Samuelson. 2017. Intellectual Humility: An Introduction to the Philosophy and Science. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Davidson Institute. 2025. “Cognitive Bias & the Dunning-Kruger Effect.” Davidson Institute of Science Education.

Kruger, Justin, and David Dunning. 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.

Leary, Mark R., et al. 2017. “Cognitive and Interpersonal Features of Intellectual Humility.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 43 (6): 793–813.

Porter, Tenelle, et al. 2021. “Clarifying the Content of Intellectual Humility: A Systematic Review and Integrative Framework.” Journal of Personality Assessment 1–13.

Somerville, Kaylee. 2021. “The Hidden Power of Intellectual Humility.” The Decision Lab.

Templeton Foundation. 2023. “Intellectual Humility.” John Templeton Foundation.

Vranic, Andrea, Ivana Hromatko, and Mirjana Tonkovic. 2022. “Meta-Ignorance and the Endorsement of Conspiracy Theories.” Frontiers in Psychology 13: 832941.

Zmigrod, L., et al. 2021. “Overconfident and Unaware: Intellectual Humility and the Calibration of Self-Assessment.” Journal of Positive Psychology 16(5): 687–701.