Successful negotiation of everyday life would seem to require people to possess insight about deficiencies in their intellectual and social skills. However, people tend to be blissfully unaware of their incompetence. This lack of awareness arises because poor performers are doubly cursed: Their lack of skill deprives them not only of the ability to produce correct responses, but also of the expertise necessary to surmise that they are not producing them. People base their perceptions of performance, in part, on their preconceived notions about their skills. Because these notions often do not correlate with objective performance, they can lead people to make judgments about their performance that have little to do with actual accomplishment.

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals suffer serious mental health disparities relative to their heterosexual peers, and researchers have linked these disparities to difficult social experiences (e.g., antigay victimization) and internalized biases (e.g., internalized homophobia) that arouse stress. A recent and growing body of evidence suggests that LGB individuals also suffer physical health disparities relative to heterosexuals, ranging from poor general health status to increased risk for cancer and heightened diagnoses of cardiovascular disease, asthma, diabetes, and other chronic conditions. Despite recent advances in this literature, the causes of LGB physical health problems remain relatively opaque. In this article, we review empirical findings related to LGB physical health disparities and argue that such disparities are related to the experience of minority stress-that is, stress caused by experiences with antigay stigma. In light of this minority stress model, we highlight gaps in the current literature and outline five research steps necessary for developing a comprehensive knowledge of the social determinants of LGB physical health.

People are typically overly optimistic when evaluating the quality of their performance on social and intellectual tasks. In particular, poor performers grossly overestimate their performances because their incompetence deprives them of the skills needed to recognize their deficits. Five studies demonstrated that poor performers lack insight into their shortcomings even in real world settings and when given incentives to be accurate. An additional meta-analysis showed that it was lack of insight into their own errors (and not mistaken assessments of their peers) that led to overly optimistic estimates among poor performers. Along the way, these studies ruled out recent alternative accounts that have been proposed to explain why poor performers hold such positive impressions of their performance.

No abstract