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。     

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.     

The generality of the levels of processing hypothesis: An application to memory for chess positions

The generality of the levels of processing approach to memory was tested by using chess positions rather than words as stimuli. Experiment 1 compared recall following semantic orienting instructions (find the best move and determine which side has the advantage), formal orienting instructions (determine the number of pieces on light squares and the number of pieces on dark squares), and intentional learning instructions using 19 novice chess players as subjects. Formal orienting instructions produced poorer recall than did either semantic orienting or intentional learning instructions, which yielded similar levels of retention. These results were replicated in Experiment 2 with 16 tournament chess players. Chess rating correlated with recall .82 under semantic orienting instructions but only —.15 under formal orienting instructions. It was concluded that the levels of processing framework has applicability outside the area of verbal learning.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Expertise in complex decision making: the role of search in chess 70 years after de Groot

One of the most influential studies in all expertise research is de Groot's (1946) study of chess players, which suggested that pattern recognition, rather than search, was the key determinant of expertise. Many changes have occurred in the chess world since de Groot's study, leading some authors to argue that the cognitive mechanisms underlying expertise have also changed. We decided to replicate de Groot's study to empirically test these claims and to examine whether the trends in the data have changed over time. Six Grandmasters, five International Masters, six Experts, and five Class A players completed the think-aloud procedure for two chess positions. Findings indicate that Grandmasters and International Masters search more quickly than Experts and Class A players, and that both groups today search substantially faster than players in previous studies. The findings, however, support de Groot's overall conclusions and are consistent with predictions made by pattern recognition models.     

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.     

Patterns of theorizing about chess skill – Commentary on Linhares and Freitas (2010) and Lane and Gobet (2011)

Although Linhares and Freitas (2010) have failed to characterize earlier experimental work in chess skill accurately, their conceptual approach of “experience-recognition”-driven problem solving points to the need to incorporate analogical reasoning mechanisms into explanations of how chess players choose the best move in chess. The Lane and Gobet (2011) commentary and the cognitive simulation models that they espouse consist of plausible mechanisms to support choosing a good move, but need additional development to incorporate abstract/semantic information. One possible avenue for future exploration will be to produce hybrid models that use both “piece-on-square” chunk and template representations and abstract high-level representations to guide search in chess.     

Mental imagery and chunks: Empirical and computational findings

To investigate experts' imagery in chess, players were required to recall briefly presented positions in which pieces were placed on the intersections between squares (intersection positions). Position types ranged from game positions to positions in which both the piece distribution and the location were randomized. Simulations were run with the CHREST model (Gobet & Simon, 2000). The simulations assumed that pieces had to be centered back, one by one, to the middle of the squares in the mind's eye before chunks could be recognized. Consistent with CHREST's predictions, chess players (N = 36), ranging from weak amateurs to grandmasters, exhibited much poorer recall for intersection positions than for standard positions (pieces placed on the centers of the squares). For the intersection positions, the skill difference in recall was larger for game positions than for the randomized positions. The participants recalled bishops better than they recalled knights, suggesting that Stroop-like interference impairs recall of the latter. The data supported both the time parameter in CHREST for shifting pieces in the mind's eye (125 msec per piece) and the seriality assumption. In general, the study reinforces the plausibility of CHREST as a model of cognition.     

They do what they are told to do: the influence of instruction on (chess) expert perception-commentary on linhares and brum (2007)

Linhares and Brum (2007) argue that they provide evidence for analogy as the main principle behind experts' acquisition of perceptual knowledge. However, the methodology they used—asking players to pair positions using abstract similarity—raises the possibility that the task reflects more the effect of directional instructions than the principles underlying the acquisition of knowledge. Here we replicate and extend Linhares and Brum's experiment and show that the matching task they used is inadequate for drawing any conclusions about the nature of experts' perception. When expert chess players were instructed to match problems based on similarities at the abstract level (analogy), they produced more abstract pairs than pairs based on concrete similarity. However, the same experts produced more concrete pairs than abstract ones when instructed to match the problems based on concrete similarity. Asking experts to match problems using explicit instructions is not an appropriate way to show the importance of either analogy or similarity in the acquisition of expert knowledge. Experts simply do what they are told to do.     

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.     

Recall or evaluation of chess positions revisited: the relationship between memory and evaluation in chess skill

We extend work by Holding and Reynolds (1982) on recall and problem solving with quasirandom chess positions. We tested 17 chess players on both quasirandom and structured chess positions. Consistent with the earlier study, initial recall of quasirandom chess positions is unrelated to chess skill level, and quality of the move selected in subsequent problem solving is related to skill level. However, recall following problem solving is related to chess skill level. These results support the view that pattern recognition processes underlie superior performance by skilled chess players, contrary to the conclusions of Holding and Reynolds (1982). Mechanisms such as long-term working memory retrieval structures (Ericsson & Kintsch, 1995) or templates (Gobet & Simon, 1996a) could explain the effective encoding of quasirandom positions during problem solving.     

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.     

Recall or evaluation of chess positions as determinants of chess skill

Previous research has found that the ability to recall briefly presented chess positions varies with playing strength, except when random positions are used. The suggestion therefore arises that mastery consists of recognizing configurations that are associated with plausible moves. This approach is tested by comparing the memory scores and move-choice protocols of players in six skill categories, using random chess positions. Contrary to any strong form of recognition-association hypothesis, differences in chess skill are shown to persist although memory differences are abolished. It is further shown that the moves selected are not based on those few pieces that are remembered. Skill-related differences in the accuracy of positional evaluations also occur, but they are less marked than in earlier results. An alternative approach to chess skill seems appropriate, in which memory effects may function at the evaluation phase.     

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.     

Experts’ memory superiority for domain-specific random material generalizes across fields of expertise: A meta-analysis

Experts’ remarkable ability to recall meaningful domain-specific material is a classic result in cognitive psychology. Influential explanations for this ability have focused on the acquisition of high-level structures (e.g., schemata) or experts’ capability to process information holistically. However, research on chess players suggests that experts maintain some reliable memory advantage over novices when random stimuli (e.g., shuffled chess positions) are presented. This skill effect cannot be explained by theories emphasizing high-level memory structures or holistic processing of stimuli, because random material does not contain large structures nor wholes. By contrast, theories hypothesizing the presence of small memory structures—such as chunks—predict this outcome, because some chunks still occur by chance in the stimuli, even after randomization. The current meta-analysis assessed the correlation between level of expertise and recall of random material in diverse domains. The overall correlation was moderate but statistically significant (\( \overline{r} = .41,p < .001 \)), and the effect was observed in nearly every study. This outcome suggests that experts partly base their superiority on a vaster amount of small memory structures, in addition to high-level structures or holistic processing.     

Gaze control and recollective experience in face recognition

In two experiments, we examined the relation between gaze control and recollective experience in the context of face recognition. In Experiment 1, participants studied a series of faces, while their eye movements were eliminated either during study or test, or both. Subsequently, they made remember/know judgements for each recognized test face. The preclusion of eye movements impaired explicit recollection without affecting familiarity-based recognition. In Experiment 2, participants examined unfamiliar faces under two study conditions (similarity vs. difference judgements), while their eye movements were registered. Similarity vs. difference judgements produced the opposite effects on remember/know responses, with no systematic effects on eye movements. However, face recollection was related to eye movements, so that remember responses were associated with more frequent refixations than know responses. These findings suggest that saccadic eye movements mediate the nature of recollective experience, and that explicit recollection reflects a greater consistency between study and test fixations than familiarity-based face recognition.     

Meta-analysis of age and skill effects on recalling chess positions and selecting the best move

A meta-analysis was conducted of studies that measured the effects of both age and skill in chess on the tasks of selecting the best move for chess positions (the best move task) as well as recalling chess game positions (the recall task). Despite a small sample of studies, we demonstrated that there are age and skill effects on both tasks: age being negatively associated with performance on both tasks and skill being positively associated with performance on both tasks. On the best move task, we found that skill was the dominant effect, while on the recall task, skill and age were approximately equally strong effects. We also found that skill was best measured by the best move task. In the case of the best move task, this result is consistent with the argument that it accurately replicates expert performance (Ericsson & Smith, 1991). Results for the recall task argue that this task captures effects related to skill, but also effects likely due to a general aging process. Implications for our understanding of aging in skilled domains are also discussed.     

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.