Quality of Expertise
Sometimes experts are clearly superior to novices. Sometimes they're merely very confident. Why?
In some fields, experts are unimaginably better than novices. Master chess players, for instance, are demonstrably better chess players than beginners. A chess master can look at a board position and immediately spot useful moves.
In other fields, people with experience in some field think they can make expert judgments about that subject, are confident in those judgments, and are correct about as often as random selection.
Why do some types of expertise have solid evidence, while others seem fundamentally broken?