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.     

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。     

Perceptual automaticity in expert chess players: Parallel encoding of chess relations

A check detection task in a 5 × 5 section of the chessboard, containing a King and one or two potential checking pieces was employed. The checking status (i.e., the presence or absence of a check) and the number of attackers (one or two) were manipulated. It was found that the reaction time cost for adding a distractor was differentially greater inno trials thanyes trials for novice, but not for expert, chess players. In addition, we contrasted standard check detection trials with trials in which one of two attackers was cued (colored red) and the task was to determine the checking status of the cued attacker while ignoring the other attacker. We documented a Stroop-like interference effect on trials in which a cued nonchecking attacker appeared together with an attacker that was checking (i.e., incongruent). These findings suggest automatic and parallel encoding procedures for chess relations in experts.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Understanding Our Understanding of Strategic Scenarios: What Role Do Chunks Play?

There is a crucial debate concerning the nature of chess chunks: One current possibility states that chunks are built by encoding particular combinations of pieces-on-squares (POSs), and that chunks are formed mostly by "close" pieces (in a "Euclidean" sense). A complementary hypothesis is that chunks are encoded by abstract, semantic information. This article extends recent experiments and shows that chess players are able to perceive strong similarity between very different positions if the pieces retain the same abstract roles in both of them. This casts doubt on the idea that POS information is the key information encoded in chess chunks, and this article proposes, instead, that the key encoding involves the abstract roles that pieces (and sets of pieces) play-a theoretical standpoint in line with the research program in semantics that places analogy at the core of cognition.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Expert and “novice” problem solving strategies in chess: Sixty years of citing de Groot (1946)

In a famous study of expert problem solving, de Groot (1946 de Groot, A. D. 1946. Het denken van den schaker, Amsterdam: Noord Hollandsche.  [Google Scholar]/1978 de Groot, A. D. 1965. Thought and choice in chess, The Hague: Mouton Publishers.  [Google Scholar]) examined how chess players found the best move. He reported that there was little difference in the way that the best players (Grand Masters) and very good players (Candidate Masters) searched the board. Although this result has been regularly cited in studies of expertise, it is frequently misquoted. It is often claimed that de Groot found no difference in the way that experts and novices investigate a problem. Comparison of expert and novice chess players on de Groot's problem shows that there are clear differences in their search patterns. We discuss the troublesome theoretical and practical consequences of incorrectly reporting de Groot's findings.     

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.     

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.     

Spatial part-set cuing facilitation

Cole, Reysen, and Kelley [2013. Part-set cuing facilitation for spatial information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, &; Cognition, 39, 1615–1620] reported robust part-set cuing facilitation for spatial information using snap circuits (a colour-coded electronics kit designed for children to create rudimentary circuit boards). In contrast, Drinkwater, Dagnall, and Parker [2006. Effects of part-set cuing on experienced and novice chess players’ reconstruction of a typical chess midgame position. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 102(3), 645–653] and Watkins, Schwartz, and Lane [1984. Does part-set cuing test for memory organization? Evidence from reconstructions of chess positions. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 38(3), 498–503] showed no influence of part-set cuing for spatial information when using chess boards. One key difference between the two procedures was that the snap circuit stimuli were explicitly connected to one another, whereas chess pieces were not. Two experiments examined the effects of connection type (connected vs. unconnected) and cue type (cued vs. uncued) on memory for spatial information. Using chess boards (Experiment 1) and snap circuits (Experiment 2), part-set cuing facilitation only occurred when the stimuli were explicitly connected; there was no influence of cuing with unconnected stimuli. These results are potentially consistent with the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis, as well as the two- and three-mechanism accounts of part-set cuing.     

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.     

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]).     

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.     

Personality and leisure activities: an illustration with chess players

The present study investigated the relationship between personality and involvement in a leisure activity: chess playing. The participants comprised three groups of highly competitive chess players, moderately competitive chess players, and a comparison group of non-players (n = 20 each). The results showed that of the six personality characteristics under investigation all chess players differed from the comparison group in terms of unconventional thinking and orderliness. In addition, highly competitive players differed from non-players in being also significantly more suspicious. The three groups did not differ significantly on neuroticism, aggressive tendency, and hostility. Implications concerning future studies of the relationship between personality and involvement in competitive leisure activities are discussed.