Chess Performance Research Articles

Playing off the curve - testing quantitative predictions of skill acquisition theories in development of chess performance.

Learning curves have been proposed as an adequate description of learning processes, no matter whether the processes manifest within minutes or across years. Different mechanisms underlying skill acquisition can lead to differences in the shape of learning curves. In the current study, we analyze the tournament performance data of 1383 chess players who begin competing at young age and play tournaments for at least 10 years. We analyze the performance development with the goal to test the adequacy of learning curves, and the skill acquisition theories they are based on, for describing and predicting expertise acquisition. On the one hand, we show that the skill acquisition theories implying a negative exponential learning curve do a better job in both describing early performance gains and predicting later trajectories of chess performance than those theories implying a power function learning curve. On the other hand, the learning curves of a large proportion of players show systematic qualitative deviations from the predictions of either type of skill acquisition theory. While skill acquisition theories predict larger performance gains in early years and smaller gains in later years, a substantial number of players begin to show substantial improvements with a delay of several years (and no improvement in the first years), deviations not fully accounted for by quantity of practice. The current work adds to the debate on how learning processes on a small time scale combine to large-scale changes.

The architecture of the chess player׳s brain

The game of chess can be seen as a typical example for an expertise task requiring domain-specific training and experience. Despite intensive behavioural studies the neural underpinnings of chess performance and expertise are not entirely understood. A few functional neuroimaging studies have shown that expert chess players recruit different psychological functions and activate different brain areas while they are engaged in chess-related activities. Based on this functional literature, we predicted to find morphological differences in a network comprised by parietal and frontal areas and especially the occipito-temporal junction (OTJ), fusiform gyrus, and caudate nucleus. Twenty expert chess players and 20 control subjects were investigated using voxel-based and surface-based morphometry as well as diffusion tensor imaging. Grey matter volume and cortical thickness were reduced in chess players compared with those of control men in the OTJ and precunei. The volumes of both caudate nuclei were not different between groups, but correlated inversely with the years of chess playing experience. Mean diffusivity was increased in chess players compared with that of controls in the left superior longitudinal fasciculus and the Elo score (a chess tournament ranking) was inversely related to mean diffusivity within the right superior longitudinal fasciculus. To the best of our knowledge we showed for the first time that there are specific differences in grey and white matter morphology between chess players and control subjects in brain regions associated with cognitive functions important for playing chess. Whether these anatomical alterations are the cause or consequence of the intensive and long-term chess training and practice remains to be shown in future studies.

Accounting for expert performance: The devil is in the details

The deliberate practice view has generated a great deal of scientific and popular interest in expert performance. At the same time, empirical evidence now indicates that deliberate practice, while certainly important, is not as important as Ericsson and colleagues have argued it is. In particular, we (Hambrick, Oswald, Altmann, Meinz, Gobet, & Campitelli, 2014) found that individual differences in accumulated amount of deliberate practice accounted for about one-third of the reliable variance in performance in chess and music, leaving the majority of the reliable variance unexplained and potentially explainable by other factors. Ericsson's (2014) defense of the deliberate practice view, though vigorous, is undercut by contradictions, oversights, and errors in his arguments and criticisms, several of which we describe here. We reiterate that the task now is to develop and rigorously test falsifiable theories of expert performance that take into account as many potentially relevant constructs as possible.

P.2.e.002 Vortioxetine (Lu AA21004), a multimodal antidepressant: differentiation from current antidepressants in animal models of depression

Stimulants and caffeine have been proposed for cognitive enhancement by healthy subjects. This study investigated whether performance in chess – a competitive mind game requiring highly complex cognitive skills – can be enhanced by methylphenidate, modafinil or caffeine. In a phase IV, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 39 male chess players received 2×200 mg modafinil, 2×20 mg methylphenidate, and 2×200 mg caffeine or placebo in a 4×4 crossover design. They played twenty 15-minute games during two sessions against a chess program (Fritz 12; adapted to players’ strength) and completed several neuropsychological tests. Marked substance effects were observed since all three substances significantly increased average reflection time per game compared to placebo resulting in a significantly increased number of games lost on time with all three treatments. Treatment effects on chess performance were not seen if all games (n=3059) were analysed. Only when controlling for game duration as well as when excluding those games lost on time, both modafinil and methylphenidate enhanced chess performance as demonstrated by significantly higher scores in the remaining 2876 games compared to placebo. In conjunction with results from neuropsychological testing we conclude that modifying effects of stimulants on complex cognitive tasks may in particular result from more reflective decision making processes. When not under time pressure, such effects may result in enhanced performance. Yet, under time constraints more reflective decision making may not improve or even have detrimental effects on complex task performance.

Practice, intelligence, and enjoyment in novice chess players: A prospective study at the earliest stage of a chess career

Previous studies have generally found no relation between IQ and chess skill in chess experts. This lack of a relation could be due to the influence of practice being more important than IQ in chess expertise. An alternative explanation is that IQ is relatively high and might therefore be restricted in range in chess experts. The current study investigated the contribution of practice, IQ and motivation to chess performance prospectively in a group of young, novice chess players in which IQ restriction of range did not play a role. Children who entered their first chess course were asked to complete weekly diaries indicating the amount of practice and their enjoyment of the course. IQ and motivation were measured using standardized tests. Using path analysis, we found that IQ and practice independently predicted chess performance on a chess test at the end of the course. Motivation influenced performance indirectly, by moderating the amount of practice that was undertaken. The results indicate that, at the early stages of expertise development, IQ and motivation influence chess performance.

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN INTELLECTUAL PERFORMANCE PERSIST AT THE LIMITS OF INDIVIDUAL CAPABILITIES

Males predominate at the top in chess, and chess is a useful domain to investigate possible causes of gender differences in high achievement. Opportunity, interest and extent of practice can be controlled for. Organized chess has objective performance measures, extensive longitudinal population-level data and little gatekeeper influence. Previous studies of gender differences in chess performance have not controlled adequately for females on average playing fewer rated games and dropping out at higher rates. The present study did so by examining performance of international chess players at asymptote and over equal numbers of rated games. Males still were very disproportionately represented at the top. Top female players showed signs of having less natural talent for chess than top males, such as taking more rated games to gain the grandmaster title. The hypothesis that males predominate because many more males play chess was tested by comparing gender performance differences in nations with varying percentages of female players. In well-practised participants, gender performance differences stayed constant even when the average national percentage of female international players increased from 4.2% to 32.3%. In Georgia, where women are encouraged strongly to play chess and females constitute nearly 32% of international players, gender performance differences are still sizeable. Males on average may have some innate advantages in developing and exercising chess skill.

Homogeneous Group Performance in Chess

We performed experiments on groups of Chess programs to test the effect of group size on performance. We studied homogeneous groups (copies of the same Chess program), as opposed to heterogeneous groups (different Chess programs). Groups were made up of Stockfish. Simple Majority Voting was used to mechanically combine the individual Chess program's decisions into a group decision. Games of Chess were played between groups of increasing size, and individual Stockfish was used as an opponent. Results show that winning rate increases with group size.

A Critique of Howard's Argument for Innate Limits in Chess Performance or Why We Need an Account Based On Acquired Skill and Deliberate Practice

Summary In this issue Howard reported that the effect of chess study is surprisingly small among elite chess players, who continue playing more games in international chess tournaments. In contrast, we show that individual differences in chess study are the likely causes of both higher chess ratings and more chess games played in international tournaments, which is often very costly and includes airfare, hotel, and tournament registration fees. The low correlation between his estimates of study time and chess rating is shown to be a consequence of his methodology of relying on a couple of questions in an internet survey rather than the standard methodology in expert performance research involving a 30-minute interview tracing yearly engagement in many different practice activities. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Practice other than playing games apparently has only a modest role in the development of chess expertise

Evidence that chess expertise rests on practice alone mostly comes from studies using a correlational retrospective recall paradigm, which confounds amount of study with number of games played and possible innate talent. Researchers also often use latest performance rating and include participants who play and study little. Study 1 partially replicated such studies with improvements such as use of peak rating and a large, skilled sample. Number of internationally-rated games played was the strongest predictor of peak rating. Total study hours was a significant but weaker predictor. Study 2 controlled for sampling confounds by including only very well-practiced players who had played at least 350 internationally-rated games. Total study hours did not predict rating at 350 games. Study 3 found that the subjective phenomenon of reaching a performance ceiling and undertaking specific practice to get beyond it does occur but does not distinguish between stronger and weaker players. Study 4 found that many players play relatively few internationally-rated games mostly because of other commitments, such as work and education. Extensive study may go along with great interest in and persistence at chess but apparently lacks a major causative role in chess performance level.

Are participation rates sufficient to explain gender differences in chess performance?

In a recent paper in the Proceedings , [Bilalic et al. (2009)][1] argued that different participation rates of men and women represent the key factor that has to be taken into account when the comparatively small number of women at the top level of certain intellectually demanding activities needs

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.

Checkmate? The role of gender stereotypes in the ultimate intellectual sport

AbstractWomen are surprisingly underrepresented in the chess world, representing less that 5% of registered tournament players worldwide and only 1% of the world's grand masters. In this paper it is argued that gender stereotypes are mainly responsible for the underperformance of women in chess. Forty‐two male–female pairs, matched for ability, played two chess games via Internet. When players were unaware of the sex of opponent (control condition), females played approximately as well as males. When the gender stereotype was activated (experimental condition), women showed a drastic performance drop, but only when they were aware that they were playing against a male opponent. When they (falsely) believed to be playing against a woman, they performed as well as their male opponents. In addition, our findings suggest that women show lower chess‐specific self‐esteem and a weaker promotion focus, which are predictive of poorer chess performance. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The role of domain-specific practice, handedness, and starting age in chess.

The respective roles of the environment and innate talent have been a recurrent question for research into expertise. The authors investigated markers of talent, environment, and critical period for the acquisition of expert performance in chess. Argentinian chess players (N = 104), ranging from weak amateurs to grandmasters, completed a questionnaire measuring variables including individual and group practice, starting age, and handedness. The study reaffirms the importance of practice for reaching high levels of performance, but it also indicates a large variability: The slower player needed 8 times as much practice to reach master level than the faster player. Additional results show a correlation between skill and starting age and indicate that players are more likely to be mixed-handed than individuals in the general population; however, there was no correlation between handedness and skill within the sample of chess players. Together, these results suggest that practice is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the acquisition of expertise, that some additional factors may differentiate chessplayers and nonchessplayers, and that starting age of practice is important.

The effects of time pressure on chess skill: an investigation into fast and slow processes underlying expert performance

The ability to play chess is generally assumed to depend on two types of processes: slow processes such as search, and fast processes such as pattern recognition. It has been argued that an increase in time pressure during a game selectively hinders the ability to engage in slow processes. Here we study the effect of time pressure on expert chess performance in order to test the hypothesis that compared to weak players, strong players depend relatively heavily on fast processes. In the first study we examine the performance of players of various strengths at an online chess server, for games played under different time controls. In a second study we examine the effect of time controls on performance in world championship matches. Both studies consistently show that skill differences between players become less predictive of the game outcome as the time controls are tightened. This result indicates that slow processes are at least as important for strong players as they are for weak players. Our findings pose a challenge for current theorizing in the field of expertise and chess.

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 ea sy identification o f experts and their development, andchess 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.

HOW INTELLECTUAL IS CHESS? – A REPLY TO HOWARD

Howard's (2005) claim that male dominance in chess is 'consistent with the evolutionary psychology view that males predominate at high achievement levels at least partly because of ability differences' (p. 378) is based on the premise that top level chess skill depends on a high level of IQ and visuospatial abilities. This premise is not supported by empirical evidence. In 1927 Djakow et al. first showed that world-class chess players do not have exceptional intellectual abilities. This finding has subsequently been confirmed many times. Different participation rates, or differences in the amount of practice, motivation and interest for chess in male and female chess players, may provide a better explanation for gender differences in chess performance.

IQ, VISUOSPATIAL ABILITY AND THE GENDER DIVIDE: A REPLY TO BILALIĆ AND McLEOD

Bilalic and McLeod's arguments fall short on several grounds. There are excellent logical reasons to expect strong ability/chess expertise links and specific research evidence to date is sparse, with mixed findings. Data are presented from Georgia, which has a high female participation rate in chess, which suggest that differing gender motivation levels and participation rates impact relatively little on chess performance differences at the extreme.

Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains.

The factors that cause large individual differences in professional achievement are only partially understood. Nobody becomes an outstanding professional without experience, but extensive experience does not invariably lead people to become experts. When individuals are first introduced to a professional domain after completing their education, they are often overwhelmed and rely on help from others to accomplish their responsibilities. After months or years of experience, they attain an acceptable level of proficiency and are able to work independently. Although everyone in a given domain tends to improve with experience initially, some develop faster than others and continue to improve during ensuing years. These individuals are eventually recognized as experts and masters. In contrast, most professionals reach a stable, average level of performance within a relatively short time frame and maintain this mediocre status for the rest of their careers. The nature of the individual differences that cause the large variability in attained performance is still debated. The most common explanation is that achievement in a given domain is limited by innate factors that cannot be changed through experience and training; hence, limits of attainable performance are determined by one’s basic endowments, such as abilities, mental capacities, and innate talents. Educators with this widely held view of professional development have focused on identifying and selecting students who possess the necessary innate talents that would allow them to reach expert levels with adequate experience. Therefore, the best schools and professional organizations nearly always rely on extensive testing and interviews to find the most talented applicants. This general view also explains age-related declines in professional achievement in terms of the inevitable reductions in general abilities and capacities believed to result from aging. In this article, I propose an alternative framework to account for individual differences in attained professional development, as well as many aspects of age-related decline. This framework is based on the assumption that acquisition of expert performance requires engagement in deliberate practice and that continued deliberate practice is necessary for maintenance of many types of professional performance. In order to contrast this alternative framework with the traditional view, I first describe the account based on innate talent. I then provide a brief review of the evidence on deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance in several performance domains, including music, chess, and sports. Finally, I review evidence from the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and examine the role of deliberate practice in this domain.

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.

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.