Effect of expertise acquisition on strategic perception: The example of chess

The two experiments presented here study perceptual processes implemented by chess players in situations related to their domain of expertise. The aim was to determine how patterns are perceived as a function of their strategic value when players acquire expertise. In this study, conducted on novice and more experienced players, it is hypothesized that with acquisition of expertise players would quickly encode familiar patterns and then rapidly focus their attention on patterns with a higher immediate strategic value. In Experiment 1, participants had to carry out a change-detection task that used the “flicker paradigm”. The results showed that during the perception of standard chess positions, experienced players—but not novices—quickly focused their attention on the most strategic patterns. In Experiment 2, experienced players and novices carried out a recognition task after having encoded chess positions for 1 or 5 s. The results indicated early encoding of familiar patterns without immediate strategic value, followed by the encoding of more strategic patterns. Taken together, the results of these two experiments are consistent with the results by both de Groot and Gobet (1996) de Groot, A. D. and Gobet, F. 1996. Perception and memory in chess. Heuristics of the professional eye, Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.  [Google Scholar] and McGregor and Howes (2002) McGregor, S. J. and Howes, A. 2002. The role of attack and defense semantics in skilled players' memory for chess positions. Memory & Cognition, 30: 707–717. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar] about the strategic content of Chase and Simon's chunks (Chase & Simon, 1973b Chase, W. G. and Simon, H. A. 1973b. Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4: 55–81. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]).     

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。     

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.     

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.     

Working memory in chess

Three experiments investigated the role of working memory in various aspects of thinking in chess. Experiment 1 examined the immediate memory for briefly presented chess positions from master games in players from a wide range of abilities, following the imposition of various secondary tasks designed to block separate components of working memory. Suppression of the articulatory loop (by preventing subvocal rehearsal) had no effect on measures of recall, whereas blocking the visuospatial sketchpad (by manipulation of a keypad) and blocking the central executive (by random letter generation) had equivalent disruptive effects, in comparison with a control condition. Experiment 2 investigated the effects of similar secondary tasks on the solution (i.e., move selection) of tactical chess positions, and a similar pattern was found, except that blocking the central executive was much more disruptive than in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 compared performance on two types of primary task, one concerned with solving chess positions as in Experiment 2, and the other a sentence-rearrangement task. The secondary tasks in each case were both designed to block the central executive, but one was verbal (vocal generation of random numbers), while the other was spatial in nature (random generation of keypresses). Performance of the spatial secondary task was affected to a greater extent by the chess primary task than by the verbal primary task, whereas there were no differential effects on these secondary tasks by the verbal primary task. In none of the three experiments were there any differential effects between weak and strong players. These results are interpreted in the context of the workingmemory model and previous theories of the nature of cognition in chess.     

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 players' intake of task-relevant cues

Patterns of chess pieces are important for chess players in storing information in memory-recall tasks. It also may be assumed that these patterns play a central role in the perceptual coding of task-relevant cues. Two perceptual classification experiments were done to test this assumption. Chess-players' intake of task-relevant cues was studied by measuring the reaction times of subjects in counting the minor pieces on the chessboard or searching for checks in the game and in random positions. Surprisingly, there was no interaction between the level of skill and the type of position. In Experiment 3, both a perceptual classification task and a memory-recall task using the same positions were presented to a group of chess players at the same session. In the perceptual classification task, there was no interaction between the level of skill and the type of position, but in the recall task there was strong interaction. The result suggests that the information intake of chess players, in its lowest levels, is not dependent on the learned patterns. The role of the patterns becomes important in defining the information to be looked for, but the patterns are not important in the early-stage perceptual structuring of a position.     

Chess expertise in children

This paper reports several studies of chess expertise in children who play competitive chess. The first study examines (1) the relationship between experience and skill among 113 school-age children (grades 1 through 12); and (2) the relationship between chess skill and scores on various spatial and logical abilities tests among the top 15 players. Improvement in skill is related to experience, and chess players score higher than average on the Raven's Progressive Matrices. Also, scores on a chess-specific test, the Knight's Tour, correlate with scores on the Raven's. The second study reports three experiments with 59 Ss involving chess-specific tasks in memory, perception, and similarity judgements. The first two experiments replicated and extended Chase and Simon (1973). The third experiment, which asked Ss to judge similarities of chess positions, demonstrated that similarity judgements become more global and abstract with increased skill. The final section describes qualitatively how children's chess expertise compares to that of adults. Drawing upon Anderson (1985), we focus on some distinctive features of children's chess play and on some successful techniques in coaching young players.     

Recall memory for visually presented chess positions

A series of three experiments replicated and extended earlier research reported by Chase and Simon (1973), de Groot (1965), and Charness (Note 1). The first experiment demonstrated that the relationship between memory for chess positions and chess skill varies directly with the amount of chess-specific information in the stimulus display. The second experiment employed tachistoscopic displays to incrementally "build" tournament chess positions by meaningful or nonmeaningful chunks and demonstrated that meaningful piece groupings during presentation markedly enhance subsequent recall performance. The third experiment tested memory for one of two positions presented in immediate sequence and demonstrated that explanations based on a limited-capacity short-term memory (Chase & Simon, 1973) are not adequate for explaining performance on this memory task.     

Revising superior planning performance in chess players: the impact of time restriction and motivation aspects

In a previous study (Unterrainer, Kaller, Halsband, & Rahm, 2006), chess players outperformed non-chess players in the Tower of London planning task but exhibited disproportionately longer processing times. This pattern of results raises the question of whether chess players' planning capabilities are superior or whether the results reflect differences in the speed-accuracy trade-off between the groups, possibly attributable to sports motivation. The present study was designed to disambiguate these alternative suggestions by implementing various constraints on planning time and by assessing self-reported motivation. In contrast to the previous study, chess players' performance was not superior, independently of whether problems had to be solved with (Experiment 1) or without (Experiment 2) time limits. As expected, chess players reported higher overall trait and state motivation scores across both experiments. These findings revise the notion of superior planning performance in chess players. In consequence, they do not conform with the assumption of a general transfer of chess-related planning expertise to other cognitive domains, instead suggesting that superior performance may be possible only under specific circumstances such as receiving competitive instructions.     

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.     

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.     

Visuospatial representations used by chess experts: A preliminary study

Blindfold chess is played without the players seeing either the pieces or the board. It is a skill‐related activity, and only very skilled players can construct the mental images required. This is why blindfold chess provides a good task with which to investigate the spatial memory and skilled mental images of expert players. In a PET investigation, we compared memory performance and problem solving in very experienced chess players with their performance in an attention task, in which the subjects classified the names of chess pieces. The memory task predominantly activated the temporal areas, whereas problem solving activated several frontal areas. The relevance of these findings to concepts such as general imagery, skilled imagery, apperception, and long‐term working memory are discussed.     

Chess players' recall of auditorily presented chess positions

Abstract

Chess players' recall of auditorily presented chess positions were studied in three experiments. The results of the first two experiments showed that the skilled chess players are better at recalling game and random positions. This contradicts the standard finding that they perform better only in game positions. In the third experiment, the memory load was increased by increasing the number of positions to be recalled simultaneously from one to four positions. Skilled subjects are still far better at recalling game positions, but they score no more than moderately skilled subjects in recalling four random positions.

The results are in contradiction with the direct chunking hypothesis. Skilled chess players do not fail to recall random positions because there are no chunks in them, but because they are not, under some special conditions, able to encode them properly. It is necessary to postulate more complicated encoding mechanisms than a simple recognition-based activation of a chunk in long-term memory.     

The expert advantage in dynamic pattern recall persists across both attended and unattended display elements

We examined how differences in attention influence how expert and novice basketball players encode into memory the specific structural information contained within patterns of play from their sport. Our participants were primed during a typical recall task to focus attention on either attacking or defending player formations before being asked to recall the attended or unattended portion of the pattern. Adherence to the instructional set was confirmed through an analysis of gaze distributions. Recall performance was superior for the experts relative to the novices across both the attended and unattended attacking and defensive pattern structures. Expert recall of attacker positions was unchanged with and without attention, whereas recall accuracy for the positions of defenders diminished without attention, as did the novices’ recall of both attack and defense formations. The findings suggest that experienced performers are better than novices at encoding the elements from a complex and dynamic pattern in the absence of focused attention, with this advantage being especially evident in relation to the recall of attacking structure. Some revision of long-term memory theories of expertise will be necessary to accommodate these findings.     

Location coding in chess

Whether the chunks used in memorizing chess positions are general and relatively encoded schemata or very precisely coded instances is a problem that has raised some controversy within the psychology of chess skill. As chess research has had a strong impact on expertise research, this problem is important in many areas of skills research other than chess. To resolve it, four experiments were set up. In the experiments it was shown that subjects were better at recalling correctly located non-transposed chunks than transposed chunks, which were similar in structure but incorrectly located on the chessboard. The results imply that the representation of chess-specific patterns in the memory of a chess player contains not only information about the forms of chess-specific patterns, but also about their absolute locations on the chessboard. This provides an explanation for the well-known interaction between skill and type of position and its disappearance in recent experiments by Lories and Saariluoma. It can be argued that the difficulty of recalling random positions is not chiefly caused by the total absence of chunks but by their dislocation.     

The role of attack and defense semantics in skilled players’ memory for chess positions

There is much evidence that chess skill is based on chunks in memory that represent parts of positions from previously encountered games. However, the content of these chunks is a matter for debate. According to one view, (1) the closer two pieces are to each other on a board (proximity), the more likely they are to be in the same chunk, and (2) skilled players encode the precise locations of pieces. An alternative view is that what information is encoded in a chess chunk is determined more by processing of the attack/defense relations during evaluation. In three experiments, participants evaluated positions and completed recognition tests. Experiment 1 supported the view that expert players make more use of attack/defense relations than of locations of pieces in a recognition test. Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrated that, for both long and short presentation times, expert players' recognition for a piece within a position was primed more by a piece related by attack or defense than by a piece merely proximal. These findings challenge theories of expertise for chess that assume a primary role for proximity and location in determining which pieces are grouped together in memory.     

Judgment and decision-making: experts' and novices' evaluation of chess positions

The present study examined how experts differ from nonexperts in estimation and evaluation during a judgment-and-decision task. In the experiment, the performance of 125 chess players (21 women and 104 men) whose mean age was 32.5 yr. (SD = 13.3) was examined to assess decision processes with an emphasis on postdecision differentiation and consolidation. Chess players of differing skill made evaluations of a complex middle-game chess position. The experimental condition was made by the means of chess articles with enclosed information, either about the current chess position or about other similar positions. Both novices and experts upgraded their chosen alternative in a postdecision phase more than intermediate level chess players did. Various explanations of these results are discussed.     

Recall of random and distorted chess positions: Implications for the theory of expertise

This paper explores the question, important to the theory of expert performance, of the nature and number of chunks that chess experts hold in memory. It examines how memory contents determine players’ abilities to reconstruct (1) positions from games, (2) positions distorted in various ways, and (3) random positions. Comparison of a computer simulation with a human experiment supports the usual estimate that chess Masters store some 50,000 chunks in memory. The observed impairment of recall when positions are modified by mirror image reflection implies that each chunk represents a specific pattern of pieces in a specific location. A good account of the results of the experiments is given by the template theory proposed by Gobet and Simon (in press) as an extension of Chase and Simon’s (1973b) initial chunking proposal, and in agreement with other recent proposals for modification of the chunking theory (Richman, Staszewski, & Simon, 1995) as applied to various recall tasks.