164,018 research outputs found
Does chess need intelligence? – A study with young chess players
No full textAlthough it is widely acknowledged that chess is the best example of an intellectual activity
among games, evidence showing the association between any kind of intellectual ability and
chess skill has been remarkably sparse. One of the reasons is that most of the studies
investigated only one factor (e.g., intelligence), neglecting other factors relevant for the acquisition of chess skill (e.g., amount of practice, years of experience). The present study investigated the chess skill of 57 young chess players using measures of intelligence (WISC
III), practice, and experience. Although practice had the most influence on chess skill, intelligence explained some variance even after the inclusion of practice. When an elite subsample of 23 children was tested, it turned out that intelligence was not a significant factor
in chess skill, and that, if anything, it tended to correlate negatively with chess skill. This
unexpected result is explained by a negative correlation between intelligence and practice in the elite subsample. The study demonstrates the dangers of focusing on a single factor in complex
real-world situations where a number of closely interconnected factors operate
On the limits of engine analysis for cheating detection in chess
No full textThe integrity of online games has important economic consequences for both the gaming industry and players of all levels, from professionals to amateurs. Where there is a high likelihood of cheating, there is a loss of trust and players will be reluctant to participate — particularly if this is likely to cost them money.
Chess is a game that has been established online for around 25 years and is played over the Internet commercially. In that environment, where players are not physically present “over the board” (OTB), chess is one of the most easily exploitable games by those who wish to cheat, because of the widespread availability of very strong chess-playing programs. Allegations of cheating even in OTB games have increased significantly in recent years, and even led to recent changes in the laws of the game that potentially impinge upon players’ privacy.
In this work, we examine some of the difficulties inherent in identifying the covert use of chess-playing programs purely from an analysis of the moves of a game. Our approach is to deeply examine a large collection of games where there is confidence that cheating has not taken place, and analyse those that could be easily misclassified.
We conclude that there is a serious risk of finding numerous “false positives” and that, in general, it is unsafe to use just the moves of a single game as prima facie evidence of cheating. We also demonstrate that it is impossible to compute definitive values of the figures currently employed to measure similarity to a chess-engine for a particular game, as values inevitably vary at different depths and, even under identical conditions, when multi-threading evaluation is used
Expertise in chess
No full textThis chapter provides an overview of research into chess expertise. After an historical background and a brief description of the game and the rating system, it discusses the information processes enabling players to choose good moves, and in particular the trade-offs between knowledge and search. Other topics include blindfold chess, talent, and the role of deliberate practice and tournament experience
Personality profiles of young chess players
No full textAlthough the game of chess has often featured in psychological research, we know very little
about people who play chess, especially about children who take up chess as a hobby. This
study presents the personality profiles as measured with the Big Five model (BFQ-C;
Barbaranelli et al., 2003) of 219 young children who play chess and 50 of their peers who do
not. Children who score higher on Intellect/openness and Energy/extraversion are more likely to play chess while children who score higher on Agreeableness are less likely to be attracted to chess. Boys with higher scores on Agreeableness are less likely to take up chess than boys with lower scores. Considering that girls score higher on Agreeableness, this factor may provide one of the possible reasons why more boys are interested in chess. Although none of the Big Five factors were associated with self-reported skill level, a sub-sample of 25 elite players had significantly higher scores on Intellect/openness than their weaker chess playing peers
Chess players' thinking revisited
No full textThe main result of De Groot’s ([1946] 1978) classical study of chessplayers’ thinking was that players of various levels of skill do not differ in the macrostructure of their thought process (in particular with respect to the depth of search and to the number of nodes investigated). Recently, Holding (1985, 1992) challenged these results and proposed that there are skill differences in the way players explore the problem space. The present study replicates De Groot’s (1978) problem solving experiment. Results show that Masters differ from weak players in more ways than found in the original study. Some of the differences support search models of chess thinking, and others pattern recognition models. The theoretical discussion suggests that the usual distinction between search and pattern recognition models of chess thinking is unwarranted, and proposes a way of reconciling the two approaches
The Role of Practice in Chess: A Longitudinal Study
No full textWe investigated the role of practice in the acquisition of chess expertise by submitting a questionnaire to 104 players of different skill levels. Players had to report their chess rating, the number of hours of individual and group practice, their use of different learning resources and activities, and whether they had been trained by a coach. The use of archival data enabled us to track the rating of some of the players throughout their career. We found that there was a strong correlation between chess skill and number of hours of practice. Moreover, group practice was a better predictor of high-level performance than individual practice. We also found that masters had a higher chess rating than expert players after only three years of serious dedication to chess, although there were no differences in the number of hours of practice. The difference that may explain the variation in rating is that masters start practising at an earlier age than experts. Finally, we found that activities such as reading books and using computer software (game databases, but not playing programs) were important for the development of high-level performance. Together with previous data and theories of expert performance, our results indicate limits in the deliberate practice framework and make suggestions on how best to carry out learning in chess and in other fields
Intelligence and chess
No full textThe goal of this paper is to critically evaluate the evidence supporting the hypothesis that innate talent (for example a higher level of intelligence) may account for aspects of chess skill. We start by giving some standard definitions of intelligence, and then present empirical data on chessplayers’ intelligence, both with children and adults. In the second part of this paper, we discuss Geschwind and Galaburda’s (1985) influential theory of the neurobiology of talent in music, mathematics, and visual arts, and review evidence of its applicability for explaining chess expertise. For that purpose, we will present empirical data based on brain lesions, brain-imaging studies, and handedness. In the conclusion, we will attempt to reconcile the strand of research emphasising practice and the role of the environment with that emphasising the role of innate talent
Recall of rapidly presented random chess positions is a function of skill.
No full textA widely cited result asserts that experts’ superiority over novices in recalling meaningful material from their domain of expertise vanishes when random material is used. A review of recent chess experiments where random positions served as control material (presentation time between 3 and 10 seconds) 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
Expert chess memory: Revisiting the chunking hypothesis
No full textAfter reviewing the relevant theory on chess expertise, this paper re-examines experimentally the finding of Chase and Simon (1973a) that the differences in ability of chess players at different skill levels to copy and to recall positions are attributable to the experts' storage of thousands of chunks (patterned clusters of pieces) in long-term memory. Despite important differences in the experimental apparatus, the data of the present experiments regarding latencies and chess relations between successively placed pieces are highly correlated with those of Chase and Simon. We conclude that the 2-second inter-chunk interval used to define chunk boundaries is robust, and that chunks have psychological reality. We discuss the possible reasons why Masters in our new study used substantially larger chunks than the Master of the 1973 study, and extend the chunking theory to take account of the evidence for large retrieval structures (templates) in long-term memory
The mind's eye in blindfold chess
No full textVisual imagery plays an important role in problem solving, and research into blindfold chess has provided a wealth of empirical data on this question. We show how a recent theory of expert memory (the template theory, Gobet & Simon, 1996, 2000) accounts for most of these data. However, how the mind’s eye filters out relevant from irrelevant information is still underspecified in the theory. We describe two experiments addressing this question, in which chess games are presented visually, move by move, on a board that contains irrelevant information (static positions, semi-static positions, and positions changing every move). The results show that irrelevant information affects chess masters only when it changes during the presentation of the target game. This suggests that novelty information is used by the mind’s eye to select incoming visual information and separate “figure” and “ground.” Mechanisms already present in the template theory can be used to account for this novelty effect
- …
