Do agents believe they agree more with others over time? This paper explores how individuals perceive the belief updating behavior of others and the resulting disagreement in a sequential experiment with public information. We uncover a persistent gap in the perception of disagreement as a function of cognitive ability. Higher cognitive ability correlates with less perceived disagreement, although the average subject underestimates the extent of actual disagreement. Information about a partner's cognitive ability only impacts perceived disagreement when the partner has a low test score. Our findings highlight the roles of overconfidence and cognitive projection in shaping these perceptions.