The perceptual aspect of skilled performance in chess: Evidence from eye movements

Expert and intermediate chess players attempted to choose the best move in five chess positions while their eye movements were monitored. Experts were faster and more accurate than intermediates in choosing the best move. Experts made fewer fixations per trial and greater amplitude saccades than did intermediates, but there was no difference in fixation duration across skill groups. Examining the spatial distribution of the first five fixations for each position by skill group revealed that experts produced more fixations on empty squares than did intermediates. When fixating pieces, experts produced a greater proportion of fixations on relevant pieces than did intermediates. It is argued that expert chess players perceptually encode chess configurations, rather than individual pieces, and, consequently, parafoveal or peripheral processing guides their eye movements, producing a pattern of saccadic selectivity by piece saliency.     

Visual span in expert chess players: evidence from eye movements

The reported research extends classic findings that after briefly viewing structured, but not random, chess positions, chess masters reproduce these positions much more accurately than less-skilled players. Using a combination of the gaze-contingent window paradigm and the change blindness flicker paradigm, we documented dramatically larger visual spans for experts while processing structured, but not random, chess positions. In addition, in a check-detection task, a minimized 3 × 3 chessboard containing a King and potentially checking pieces was displayed. In this task, experts made fewer fixations per trial than less-skilled players, and had a greater proportion of fixations between individual pieces, rather than on pieces. Our results provide strong evidence for a perceptual encoding advantage for experts attributable to chess experience, rather than to a general perceptual or memory superiority.     

中国象棋经验棋手与新手的知觉差异:来自眼动的证据

为探讨中国象棋领域内的专长效应及象棋专长的知觉编码优势,研究采用中国象棋棋局为实验材料,对比了经验棋手和新手在观看象棋棋局时视觉搜索、变化觉察和对棋盘的记忆。实验1呈现真实棋局和随机棋局,要求被试观看5秒后复盘,结果发现经验棋手的复盘正确率高于新手;经验棋手注视棋盘的眼跳幅度和瞳孔直径更大;经验棋手更多注视棋子间而不是棋子本身。实验2采用移动窗口范式控制了观看棋盘时视野大小,结果发现经验棋手在副中央凹呈现时复盘正确率更高,而新手不受视野大小的影响。实验3采用闪烁范式要求棋手觉察变化的棋子,结果发现经验棋手的觉察速度和正确率都优于新手;而且经验棋手在报告变化前就利用中央凹和副中央凹注视到了变化的棋子。结论认为:中国象棋与国际象棋类似,也存在专长的知觉编码优势效应;经验棋手不仅对棋盘记忆更好,而且可以利用存贮的组块和长期练习经验选择性加工棋盘结构信息,利用副中央凹提取信息,具有更大的知觉广度。研究为象棋专家可以利用副中央凹加工棋盘及具有更强的知觉编码能力提供了直接的证据。     

Expertise and hierarchical knowledge representation in chess

Summary In two experiments the structure of knowledge representation in chess experts and average players was examined. Pattern-recognition theory explains expertise through the existence of many small, unrelated knowledge units. Recent research stresses the structure of knowledge representations. However, the standard paradigm does not allow for the detection of relations between chunks; the theoretical shift has to be accompanied by a methodological shift. In Experiment 1, by means of a partitioning task, evidence was provided for a hierarchical representation of chess positions. Chess masters formed larger and more complex knowledge units than average players. In Experiment 2, the typicality of the positions was varied. The more typical the positions were, the larger and more coherent the constructed knowledge units were. The greatest differences between both groups occurred in more typical positions. This reflects the experts' ability to relate several knowledge units with one another.     

Chess masters show a hallmark of face processing with chess

Face processing has several distinctive hallmarks that researchers have attributed either to face-specific mechanisms or to extensive experience distinguishing faces. Here, we examined the face-processing hallmark of selective attention failure--as indexed by the congruency effect in the composite paradigm--in a domain of extreme expertise: chess. Among 27 experts, we found that the congruency effect was equally strong with chessboards and faces. Further, comparing these experts with recreational players and novices, we observed a trade-off: Chess expertise was positively related to the congruency effect with chess yet negatively related to the congruency effect with faces. These and other findings reveal a case of expertise-dependent, facelike processing of objects of expertise and suggest that face and expert-chess recognition share common processes.     

Perception in chess

This paper develops a technique for isolating and studying the perceptual structures that chess players perceive. Three chess players of varying strength — from master to novice — were confronted with two tasks: (1) A perception task, where the player reproduces a chess position in plain view, and (2) de Groot's (1965) short-term recall task, where the player reproduces a chess position after viewing it for 5 sec. The successive glances at the position in the perceptual task and long pauses in the memory task were used to segment the structures in the reconstruction protocol. The size and nature of these structures were then analyzed as a function of chess skill.     

Cognitive Reorganization and the development of chess expertise

One current research strategy in the study of expertise is to compare experts and novices. An important aspect of decision making involves looking for similarities among problem types. Little is known about such processes. We used grid technique to examine similarity judgments associated with different levels of chess expertise. Novice, expert, and master chess players evaluated 4 sets of 12 chess boards. Average FIC scores showed a curvilinear relation to expertise, suggesting increasing differentiation followed by integration in cognitive frameworks for construing board positions. Additional cognitive measures based on move generation tended to support and extend this structural model.     

Visual span and change detection in soccer: An expertise study

There is evidence to suggest that sports experts are able to extract more perceptual information from a single fixation than novices when exposed to meaningful tasks that are specific to their field of expertise. In particular, Reingold et al. (2001) showed that chess experts use a larger visual span including fewer fixations when compared to their less skilled counterparts. The aim of the present study was to examine whether also in a more complex environment, namely soccer, skilled players use a larger visual span and fewer fixations than less skilled players when attempting to recognise players’ positions. To this end, we combined the gaze-contingent window technique with the change detection paradigm. Results seem to suggest that skilled soccer players do not use a larger visual span than less skilled players. However, skilled soccer players showed significantly fewer fixations of longer duration than their less skilled counterparts, supporting the notion that experts may extract more information from a single glance.     

Deliberate practice predicts performance over time in adolescent chess players and drop‐outs: A linear mixed models analysis

In this study, the longitudinal relation between deliberate practice and performance in chess was examined using a linear mixed models analysis. The practice activities and performance ratings of young elite chess players, who were either in, or had dropped out of the Dutch national chess training, were analysed since they had started playing chess seriously. The results revealed that deliberate practice (i.e. serious chess study alone and serious chess play) strongly contributed to chess performance. The influence of deliberate practice was not only observable in current performance, but also over chess players' careers. Moreover, although the drop‐outs' chess ratings developed more slowly over time, both the persistent and drop‐out chess players benefited to the same extent from investments in deliberate practice. Finally, the effect of gender on chess performance proved to be much smaller than the effect of deliberate practice. This study provides longitudinal support for the monotonic benefits assumption of deliberate practice, by showing that over chess players' careers, deliberate practice has a significant effect on performance, and to the same extent for chess players of different ultimate performance levels. The results of this study are not in line with critique raised against the deliberate practice theory that the factors deliberate practice and talent could be confounded.     

Visualization,pattern recognition,and forward search: effects of playing speed and sight of the position on grandmaster chess errors

A new approach examined two aspects of chess skill, long a popular topic in cognitive science. A powerful computer‐chess program calculated the number and magnitude of blunders made by the same 23 grandmasters in hundreds of serious games of slow (“classical”) chess, regular “rapid” chess, and rapid “blindfold” chess, in which opponents transmit moves without ever seeing the actual position. Rapid chess led to substantially more and larger blunders than classical chess. Perhaps more surprisingly, the frequency and magnitude of blunders did not differ in rapid versus blindfold play, despite the additional memory and visualization load imposed by the latter. We discuss the involvement of various cognitive processes in human problem‐solving and expertise, especially with respect to chess. Prior opposing views about the basis of general chess skill have emphasized the dominance of either (a) swift pattern recognition or (b) analyzing ahead, but both seem important and the controversy appears currently unresolvable and perhaps fruitless.     

Dynamic perception in chess

The present study examines the dynamic aspects of perceptual processes in expert chess players. This topic is approached in terms of the anticipation processes carried out by experienced players during the encoding of chess positions. The aim of the first experiment, which used a short-term comparison task, was to stress the role of anticipation, which allows expert players to focus their attention on the area of the studied position where they expect the likely standard move to occur. The second experiment used a long-term recognition task. The results showed that expert players made many false recognitions on the new positions that could be expected from the positions presented in the preliminary study phase. Taken together, the results of the two experiments highlight the anticipatory component of expert perception.     

Expertise and age effects on knowledge activation in chess

Novice, intermediate, and expert chess players of various ages, playing with two chess pieces on a quarter-section of a chessboard, performed a simple task to detect that the king is in check or is threatened with being in check. Age slowed response for both tasks. An interaction of task and skill revealed differences in diminishing response time between check and threat tasks as skill increased; experts were equally fast on both tasks. Measures of speed and working memory were negatively related to age but unrelated to skill. Skill did not mitigate age-related effects on speed of detection. These results suggest that knowledge-activation processes necessary to assess basic chess relationships slow with age, even in experts.     

Mechanisms and neural basis of object and pattern recognition: a study with chess experts

Comparing experts with novices offers unique insights into the functioning of cognition, based on the maximization of individual differences. Here we used this expertise approach to disentangle the mechanisms and neural basis behind two processes that contribute to everyday expertise: object and pattern recognition. We compared chess experts and novices performing chess-related and -unrelated (visual) search tasks. As expected, the superiority of experts was limited to the chess-specific task, as there were no differences in a control task that used the same chess stimuli but did not require chess-specific recognition. The analysis of eye movements showed that experts immediately and exclusively focused on the relevant aspects in the chess task, whereas novices also examined irrelevant aspects. With random chess positions, when pattern knowledge could not be used to guide perception, experts nevertheless maintained an advantage. Experts' superior domain-specific parafoveal vision, a consequence of their knowledge about individual domain-specific symbols, enabled improved object recognition. Functional magnetic resonance imaging corroborated this differentiation between object and pattern recognition and showed that chess-specific object recognition was accompanied by bilateral activation of the occipitotemporal junction, whereas chess-specific pattern recognition was related to bilateral activations in the middle part of the collateral sulci. Using the expertise approach together with carefully chosen controls and multiple dependent measures, we identified object and pattern recognition as two essential cognitive processes in expert visual cognition, which may also help to explain the mechanisms of everyday perception.     

Dynamic perception in chess

The present study examines the dynamic aspects of perceptual processes in expert chess players. This topic is approached in terms of the anticipation processes carried out by experienced players during the encoding of chess positions. The aim of the first experiment, which used a short-term comparison task, was to stress the role of anticipation, which allows expert players to focus their attention on the area of the studied position where they expect the likely standard move to occur. The second experiment used a long-term recognition task. The results showed that expert players made many false recognitions on the new positions that could be expected from the positions presented in the preliminary study phase. Taken together, the results of the two experiments highlight the anticipatory component of expert perception.     

Chess knowledge predicts chess memory even after controlling for chess experience: Evidence for the role of high-level processes

The expertise effect in memory for chess positions is one of the most robust effects in cognitive psychology. One explanation of this effect is that chess recall is based on the recognition of familiar patterns and that experts have learned more and larger patterns. Template theory and its instantiation as a computational model are based on this explanation. An alternative explanation is that the expertise effect is due, in part, to stronger players having better and more conceptual knowledge, with this knowledge facilitating memory performance. Our literature review supports the latter view. In our experiment, a sample of 79 chess players were given a test of memory for chess positions, a test of declarative chess knowledge, a test of fluid intelligence, and a questionnaire concerning the amount of time they had played nontournament chess and the amount of time they had studied chess. We determined the numbers of tournament games the players had played from chess databases. Chess knowledge correlated .67 with chess memory and accounted for 16% of the variance after controlling for chess experience. Fluid intelligence accounted for an additional 13% of the variance. These results support the conclusion that both high-level conceptual processing and low-level recognition of familiar patterns play important roles in memory for chess positions.     

Recall of rapidly presented random chess positions is a function of skill

A widely cited result asserts that experts’ superiority over novices in recalling meaningful material from their domain of expertise vanishes when they are confronted with random material. A review of recent chess experiments in which random positions served as control material (presentation time between 3 and 10 sec) shows, however, that strong players generally maintain some superiority over weak players even with random positions, although the relative difference between skill levels is much smaller than with game positions. The implications of this finding for expertise in chess are discussed and the question of the recall of random material in other domains is raised.     

Specialization effect and its influence on memory and problem solving in expert chess players

Expert chess players, specialized in different openings, recalled positions and solved problems within and outside their area of specialization. While their general expertise was at a similar level, players performed better with stimuli from their area of specialization. The effect of specialization on both recall and problem solving was strong enough to override general expertise—players remembering positions and solving problems from their area of specialization performed at around the level of players 1 standard deviation (SD) above them in general skill. Their problem-solving strategy also changed depending on whether the problem was within their area of specialization. When it was, they searched more in depth and less in breadth; with problems outside their area of specialization, the reverse. The knowledge that comes from familiarity with a problem area is more important than general purpose strategies in determining how an expert will tackle it. These results demonstrate the link in experts between problem solving and memory of specific experiences and indicate that the search for context-independent general purpose problem-solving strategies to teach to future experts is unlikely to be successful.     

The effects of speed on skilled chess performance

Two types of mechanisms may underlie chess skill: fast mechanisms, such as recognition, and slow mechanisms, such as search through the space of possible moves and responses. Speed distinguishes these mechanisms, so I examined archival data on blitz chess (5 min for the whole game), in which the opportunities for search are greatly reduced. If variation in fast processes accounts for substantial variation in chess skill, performance in blitz chess should correlate highly with a player's overall skill. In addition, restricting search processes should tend to equalize skill difference between players, but this effect should decrease as overall skill level increases. Analyses of three samples of blitz chess tournaments supported both hypotheses. Search is undoubtedly important, but up to 81% of variance in chess skill (measured by rating) was accounted for by how players performed with less than 5% of the normal time available.     

A complete database of international chess players and chess performance ratings for varied longitudinal studies

Chess is an oft-used study domain in psychology and artificial intelligence because it is well defined, its performance rating systems allow easy identification of experts and their development, and chess playing is a complex intellectual task. However, usable computerized chess data have been very limited. The present article has two aims. The first is to highlight the methodological value of chess data and how researchers can use them to address questions in quite different areas. The second is to present a computerized database of all international chess players and official performance ratings beginning from the inaugural 1970 international rating list. The database has millions of records and gives complete longitudinal official performance data for over 60,000 players from 1970 to the present. Like a time series of population censuses, these data can be used for many different research and teaching purposes. Three quite different studies, conducted by the author using the database, are described.     

Planning abilities and chess: A comparison of chess and non‐chess players on the Tower of London task

Playing chess requires problem‐solving capacities in order to search through the chess problem space in an effective manner. Chess should thus require planning abilities for calculating many moves ahead. Therefore, we asked whether chess players are better problem solvers than non‐chess players in a complex planning task. We compared planning performance between chess (N=25) and non‐chess players (N=25) using a standard psychometric planning task, the Tower of London (ToL) test. We also assessed fluid intelligence (Raven Test), as well as verbal and visuospatial working memory. As expected, chess players showed better planning performance than non‐chess players, an effect most strongly expressed in difficult problems. On the other hand, they showed longer planning and movement execution times, especially for incorrectly solved trials. No differences in fluid intelligence and verbal/visuospatial working memory were found between both groups. These findings indicate that better performance in chess players is associated with disproportionally longer solution times, although it remains to be investigated whether motivational or strategic differences account for this result.