Synergies of Analysis of Visually Impaired with Synthesis of Thought Processes in Chess -FULL TEXT

Full text

Synergies of Analysis of Visually Impaired with Synthesis of Thought Processes
in Chess
Malola Prasath T S Radha Raghavan Malola Priya S IM Sundarajan Kidambi
Foundation for Learning Research in Chess, India
42/7 Janakiraman Street, West Mambalam, Chennai, India- 600033
malolaprasath@gmail.com radharaghavan@gmail.com malolapriya@hotmail.com
sundarkidambi@gmail.com

Abstract:
We summarize various thinking patterns in chess, where the synergy of thought processes generated by
chess learners with visually impaired results in better understanding of the learning goals, compared to
the groups of sighted or the visually impaired students. We qualitatively measure the impact of their
synergy in meeting the learning objective in chess.
Keywords: Chess in Schools, Instructional design, Active Learning, Synergy of thought processes,
Analysis, Synthesis, Baseline.
I. Introduction
The learning abilities of visually impaired students have been well understood from the studies in the
field of cognitive science. Numerous works have been published in understanding the sensation, spatial
reasoning and perception of visually impaired. Technological development in has equally supported to
improve the quality of life by providing visually impaired with the accessibility to the information that
open to sighted people of the world. Currently, the field of Human Computer Interaction has greatly
influenced the web-based design over interactive websites design for the access of visually impaired.
These developments have proved the worth of life for the visually impaired. Visually impaired students
have currently been accepted by regular schools where they interact with sighted to learn the common
subject. Our motivation is to strengthen the bond of visually impaired with the general schools through
chess since the technology is not within the reach of an average blind student. The game of chess has
significantly influenced both the sighted and visually impaired over years. There have been critical
researches in education as in [13], [15], [16] that have paved the way for chess to come in schools to
enrich the formal education. Our motivation to take chess as a platform improving the student’s ability
comes from common observation with experienced chess players, who back-propagate the information of
chessboard as a backdrop noise to improve the focus on the co-ordination of pieces. Such visual
perception, of eliminating the disturbance generated from mundane chess elements like color imbalance,
playing turn, writing score sheets, opponent moving the pieces etc.., to the background helps players to
concentrate into the dynamism within the game. However, chessboard is the significant information,
which one tried to understand in endgame, when the pieces are too few in number. Many of the strong
players have failed to realize the understanding of the chessboard during crunching time controls.
However, the visually impaired understands the entire information starting from the knowledge of the
chessboard. We speculated that the mutual exchange of observations over chess would potentially help
the students to progress in a more predictable form. In this paper, we compare the quality of thought
processes generated by a group of sighted chess learners with visually impaired, against the quality of
thought processes generated by their counter parts to summarize the patterns in chess, where the synergy
of visually impaired in meeting the learning objectives exceeds the mutual counter parts. We wished to
measure against the common platform of chess, where the objective was to experience the same
understanding. However, due to certain fundamental lacuna of the visually-impaired, measuring the
synergy of sighted players with visually impaired seemed more justified than just stabilizing the stimuli
for learning. We also coupled the teaching goals in the system was more towards understanding,
assimilating and propagating learning across students to bring them to a common platform.
II. Realm of Chess Cognition
We have considered two major factors when it comes to approaching chess from the perspective
absorbing instructions that go to differently impaired players. The first factor is the cognitive ability of
students in interfacing with chess and the imagination derived out of chess. The second factor is the
visibility over the higher dimension of chess, which brings out the priorities related to chess. The
following sections highlight such factors as applicable to the differently impaired students.
A. Method and Motive over Differently Impaired

There is undoubtedly a difference in cognition between the visually impaired and the sighted players
connecting to chess. The first obvious difference is the method of connecting to the chess elements, where
the sighted students potentially end up using multiple sensations to connect to position whereas visually
impaired students use touch as a major stimuli to connect to chess. However, the artifact of the method is
a meta-cognitive state that the differently impaired chess players. In the case of the sighted players, they
obtain the holistic view of the board and pieces; where as their visually impaired students touch the
squares to obtain highly localized view of a chessboard. This meta-cognition developed in the differently
impaired students has serious artifacts in terms of motive for generation such methods. In sighted
students, the sensation of holistic view of chessboard and the need to commit a move results in the
synthesis of new positions. Since the holistic view is available, more emphasis is placed on the breaking
the inertia to explore realms of imagination. Since such holistic view is not available with the blind
students, the emphasis is more in constructing the map in their mind before they are triggered into thought
of committing to a move. Thus the motive of visually impaired is more towards constructing the full
position in mind, which is more objective in nature. The fact that blind students first encounter the
squares first and then to pieces shows that their propagate confidence over the squares that they can trust
as a landmark than on the pieces that are hardly localized in chessboard. The visually impaired students
lose the notion of imagination due to repeated drive towards the squares. However, the sighted players
propagate their confidence in the accuracy of move sequence in reaching a comfortable position, where
they would be able to localize the pieces. Thus, there is a fundamental difference in visually impaired
students adhering to analytical means to stick to the reality of the position, where as the sighted students,
explore their imagination to synthesize fresh positions and then come back to the same position with a
biased vision. One more significant difference is that the visually impaired students, understands the color
information based on the touch stimuli, the grooves chess board directly indicate color. The color is often
back propagated in sighted students. Eventually in both the methods, commonality of the method is the
urge to target and defend the localized pieces. For example, the King, lose pieces and backward pawns
are cues in any position, where the differently paired students stand on the same direction of observation.
The second commonality between the visually impaired and the sighted chess players is the possessing of
a natural style of play. In the case of the sighted players, the focus has considerably shifted from pure
aggressive style to a more positional style. However, visualization of such positions requires perception
of complex images of the chessboard to be super-imposed over the existing position. The difficulty of the
visually impaired is to observe the complex image of the chessboard. The visually impaired students
depend more on the attack defense mechanisms to basically progress with chess. This optimizes the mind
towards purely analytical method of progressing in chess for the visually impaired. The notion of
incremental progress from the current position to relatively better position is achieved in both the cases at
varied degrees. However, in a timed game, there are artifacts towards adapting both these methods and
hence the players settle for sub-optimal positions. We speculate that the synergy of visually-impaired with
sighted chess players achieves this progress in an optimal fashion as compared to their counter-parts.
B. Visibility over Chess in Differently Impaired
We lay emphasis on the first stimulus encountered by students, as it influences the perception developed
by the students. We have identified that the first stimuli for sighted players to be the pieces from thought
processes are generated towards perceiving the stability over the squares. The first stimuli for the visually
impaired are the squares, which they touch and secondly the color information over grooved squares and
nailed pieces. Table 1 summarizes the responses of differently impaired that we have arrived at based on
discussions with both visually impaired and sighted chess players.
Stimulus Visually Impaired Sighted
Chess board Baseline Background
Squares Primary Input Secondary Response
Pieces Secondary Response to squares as
Stimulus
Primary Input
Pawns Primary Response to Squares as Primary Stimulus to Squares as

Stimulus Response
King Stimulus to Final Baseline Stimulus to Final Baseline
Piece co-ordination Perceived Information Sensed Information
Relative Squares Sensed Information Perceived Information
Color Imbalance Perceived from Sensation of the
squares and pieces
Sensed from Perception of
activity of pieces.
Table 1: Chess elements Portrayed by visually impaired and sighted students
III. Problem Identification
In this paper, we study a very special case of learning, where we involve blind students as an agent
towards better realization of chess concepts. We speculate that the discussion entertained with blind
students is instrumental in stabilizing the conflicts in thought processes generated by sighted players
while visualizing a position and simultaneously simulating feeling of executing a decision over a move.
We trigger this discussion with respect to an initial baseline position, which is set by the tutor. We tend to
progress to the next baseline with the help of such discussions. We have developed materials in such a
way that the differently impaired students take the same time to connect to the position and familiarize the
position. The visually impaired, fully understand the spatial reasoning of the squares and the stability of
pieces on the square. In the same time, the sighted chess players explore the candidate moves broadly and
arrive at some synthesis patterns that are familiar for them, over specific time budget. Once the familiarity
is obtained with respected to the position, the discussions play a crucial role in guiding individuals
towards a target that needs attention from second perspective.
A. Baseline of Cognition
Figure 1, represents the graphical model, describing the interactions possible in such environment. The
sighted students are localized more towards the final baseline and the visually impaired students are
localized more to the initial base, through their individualistic approaches discussed in section II. The
mechanism of discussion, guides the students through the transition from initial baseline to next base line.
In the case of the sighted students, they are expected to realize the next baseline visualized by them, for
which they would require to connect back to the initial baseline without losing the sight of imagined
position. In the case of the visually impaired students, they are expected to progress towards the
imagination envisioned by the sighted students. In such process, we expect the sighted students to identify
the visually impaired students as the indicator for progress in their realization process. For visually
impaired students, the environment itself poses a transformation experience to make them realize that
visual impairment is not an overhead to the learning capability. The figure depicts the various
components of interaction identified among the students.
B. Exchange of Perception
The notion of the chessboard is back propagated to the background by sighted players to maximize their
vision into the co-ordination pieces, which is inherently not localized in a chessboard. Since the squares
are localized, the confidence placed on the analysis performed by the blind student students can be more
objective over their evaluation. This is analytical in nature. The visually impaired students are thus
expected to provide this analytical information during the discussions, which they were trained to do
during the discussion. The thoughts exchanged by the sighted student are the stimulus for synthesis,
which visually impaired students do not sense directly from the stimuli. On the other hand, the case is the
same for sighted players that they do not have the analytical means of objectively validate a position,
since they evaluate the position based on the piece co-ordination. The materialism that sighted student’s
compare with is just an indicator for arriving at decisions. However much of the co-ordination is
perceived as complex images, which limits the visually impaired to obtain such stimuli directly. As
evidence, we can show that when the pieces are very much localized over the squares, they eventually
become as targets – this is possibly a reason for initiating the attack towards the king, which is localized
within chessboard, whereas other pieces can perish out of the board. Thus transition from pieces to

squares is a more profound quality that sighted students have. However, the visually impaired remove the
noise of synthesis and hence they are very much oriented with the position. The inclination to baseline is
observed over the behavior of tracing their pieces to the baseline of chessboard over games we studied.
We focus on instructional design in such a way that these perception cues are exchanged over discussion
Table 2: Graphical Model Representing the Observed Interaction
.
IV. Instructional Design
Current Baseline
Visually Impaired
Analysis
Chess
Synthesis
Visual
Touch
Discussion
Sighted Students
Imagination
Reality
Next Baseline

We developed instructional design in terms of chess positions that one would encounters, by subjective
means. Hence, we develop classroom materials with goal to exhaust the visibility of chess, in terms of
the reality component and imagination component that individual students perceive, while experiencing
the stimuli from chess. We decouple the emotional context of the game, by means of alternate
formulation, where the opponent specific emotions are replaced by a notion of progressing along the
baseline. In such conditions, the students shift their confidence over multiple baselines to achieve the
ultimate goal of understanding the objective of the subjective play, rather than switching between the
thought processes. This is the ultimate role of the visually impaired students to provide a stimulus for
the synthesizing mind to connect to a baseline, rather than adapt over fast switching thought processes.
The instruction design components are identified in such a manner that it accommodates the differently
impaired students over the elements of chess. We had worked on the developing pre-requisites for
setting entry level criteria for discussions. However, Chess offers much scope for valid subjective
reasoning, which makes any type of objective entry levels as ill-posed. Thus, we developed short
orientation program to bring a visibility over chess elements to mutually understand the cognitive
abilities. The orientation program is to formally re-introduce the pieces, in such a way pieces are the
soul of imagination and the squares are the soul of Reality. The orientation program also captures the
reactive characteristics of students, which introduces many undesirable artifacts in terms of emotional
attachment. The students are also informed about the goal of the class room session is to obtain the
highest rank over the metric identified and the solution were given to them for validating them, rather
than solving the position. This helps us to minimize artifacts from the aspect of reacting to the stimulus
of learning, whether it is the people or the tempting positions. The Table 2 describes the overview of the
instructional design guidelines, highlighting the motive of each and every instructional design.
Instruction Design Exercise
Development
Elements Description
Orientation For
Sighted players
Remove One side for
sighted players
Perception The search of ideal squares
for pieces sensed in the
board.
Orientation For
Visually Impaired
Remove One side for
Visually-impaired
Sensation The ease of tracing pieces to
perceived spatial reasoning
Sensation exercise Shortest Single Piece
Mate
Goal The reality of final baseline
Sensation Exercise Minor Piece Mate Control Controlling King towards
mate
Sensation Exercise for
Visually Impaired and
Perception exercise
for sighted
King and Pawn Ending Relative Control Controlling King against
committing the pawns
Sensation Exercise for
Visually Impaired and
Perception exercise
for sighted
Piece maneuver
relative to the color
Sensation for
Extremities
within Chess
Weaknesses / Color
Complexions Exploitation
Perception Exercise Piece co-ordination
and
Space Advantage
Perception of
Integration
Imagination of the co-
ordination of space from
piece and square perspective.
Perception Exercise Tactical Exchanges Absolute
Control
Controlled reaction of
exchanges
Perception Exercise Endgame transition Visibility over Visibility of control of the

progressive
milestones
game
Integrating Sensation
and Perception
Game Analysis Visibility over
Familiarity
Retrospective development
Table 2: Instructional Design for Chess elements
We employed three major means of accomplishing the instructional design. Firstly, we derived strong
attack defense patterns based on rearrangement of the initial position in a Fischer random chess setup.
This removed the artifacts from the opening favoritism. Secondly, we derived each positions selected
have the following objectives
Clarity in the position for differently impaired people to understand current baseline
Exploratory position than finding tricky, yet trivial continuations
Exhaust the usability of squares, pieces and pawns.
Similar patterns that observable with multiple piece co-ordination.
Thirdly, we derived positions from the Silman’s workbook [17] to understand how well the students
sense the imbalances that are asserted for a given position and how much of the imbalances go into the
discussions.
A. Measurements of Quality
The primary goal of this system is develop a sense of accepting imbalance over various degrees and
trying to convert it to an advantage to evolve within a learning framework. We identified four major
qualities, which we expected our students to align with our objectives over the process of learning.
Firstly, we emphasize on the stability of accepting the imbalance. It is also accounted for the mentors
and observers within the system for minimizing the frustration generated from subjective learning
practices. Secondly, we measure the progress from quality of discussions entertained towards objective
progress within the system. This ensures the instruction reaches the differently impaired students. The
third is the extent of assimilation of the subject introduced to the students groups. The notion ff
measuring the assimilation gives the extent to which the students have imbibed the learning. We
measure the assimilation from the in vivo observation of student being able to reproduce the learning as
described by the instructor into the work culture and at the same time, educate other students. This has
been critical, as students have a general tendency to hide their realization and this characteristic feature
also propagates deep into their character. The extent to which the students are able to transfer the
learning is captured as quality of usability. These four quality attributes help us to assess the evolution
of the students from an in vivo observation. The major artifacts from the stress to concentrate in this
framework are removed when the element of reactive impact over the excitement are controlled. This is
achieved originally achieved through the orientation program, where the reactive characteristics are
identified over exercises. However, it is progressively minimized over mentor interaction to preserve
the group cohesion. Mentors subconsciously train the student to learn the objectives through their
subjective means. The role of observers is to measure the orientation of the mentors with the group.
V. Experiment
The first concern was the ratio of blind student to normal student, which remained to heuristic selection.
However, we considered designing the entire classroom and measure in the interaction ‘in vivo’ to
avoid adopting rigorous validation procedure. Hence we came up with a novel design where we
observed the synergy effect of specific interactions localized within the group of students seated with
reference to instructors with many observers around the group. The experiments were based on the
instructional design developed from chess books that we assisted author over the years with local chess
publishers. Thus, this gave us thoroughness in the material we were dealing and at the same time, the
characteristics of the intended audience were more absorbed in the materials which we developed.

However, we augmented many valuable examples that were chosen from Silman’s books [17], [18] to
verify compliance with significant chess literature.
A. Quality of Sample
We employed 24 students for our study, where 3 students were visually impaired. We clustered
the 24 students into 3 groups of 8 each marked as described in the Table 5 and classes were
planned over three sessions.
Participants Group A Group B Group C
Sighted Student 5 4 6
Blind Students 1 2 0
Observers 2 2 2
Mentors/Teachers 1 1 1
Table 3: Distribution of students in each group
B. Orientation towards Boosting the Sample
30 hours of exposure to the general notion of the game is given before students are put into specific
classroom design that we have come up this. The goal of such classes is to give an insight into few of
the tactics and strategy tips that will provoke students to go for more similar patterns and self organized
attacking pattern. The classes are revised well so that the students build a capability to reproduce any
short game or position shown to them. Secondly the sensation and perception exercises described in the
instructional design were carried out to understand the basic instinct of every student. When the
students have completed the two entry-level exercises, they move into the experimentation classroom.
C. Classroom Structure for Experimentation
The visibility of the instructor is very crucial for controlling the dialog among the students. Hence six
students are allowed to take the board and the remaining two students take the other end of the
instructor to have a holistic vision of what is going on in the group.
Figure 2: Represents the Top view of the Seating Arrangement in the classroom
D. Class Room Activity
We have organized the classroom activity into the following phases.
Introduction of the task
Individual analysis
Discussion Activity
In vivo observation and documentation
Feedback by Mentors
We selection 40 positions covering all the aspects of the instructional design from [17], [19], [21] and
[24]. The classroom activities are predominantly discussion oriented. The observers also participate
over the discussions however they are refrained from telling the solution, during the individual analysis
time, and they are given the solution before the discussion activity. The goal of observers is to observe
S6 VI2 S7
S8 VI3 S9
O3
M2
O4
VI1 S1 S2
S3 S4 S5
O1
M1
O2
S13 S14 S15
S10 S11 S12
O5
M3
O6
O – Observing Students VI – Visually Impaired S- Students Participating M – Mentors
# Observers – 6 # Visually Impaired– 3 # Sighted - 21 # Mentors – 3

the reactive indications of students. The Observers constantly communicate with the researchers,
outside the classroom arena. The class room-activity is timed to ensure that students could be rotated
over multiple examples, to overcome the fatigue of monotony.
E. Results:
The respective mentors and observers graded the response to the instructional design, which was then
consolidated for a final ranking. The ranking was done against the metrics described in section IV. The
quality of observation of mentor and observers were also computed from the comparison over the
quality of observation. The Table 4 gives the overview of the final ranking observed against the metrics
identified. The Table 5 summarizes final ranking for the observers and the mentors against the same
metrics, for participation with the blind students. The Table 6 summarizes final ranking assigned by
consolidating the observations from both observers and mentors.
Group Stability Progress Assimilation Usability
A 1 1 2 2
B 2 3 1 1
C 3 2 3 3
Table 4: Summarizing the ranking assigned by observer and Mentors
Group Stability Progress Assimilation Usability
Observer 2 1 1 1
Mentor 1 2 2 2

Table 5: Summarizing the ranking projected on observer and Mentors
Instructional Design Elements Group A Group B Group C
Remove One side for
Sighted players
Perception, synthesis and
Reactivity
- - -
Remove One side for
Visually-impaired
Sensation, Analysis and
Spatial reasoning,
- - -
Shortest Single Piece Mate Goal 2 1 3
Minor Piece Mate Control 2 3 1
King and Pawn Ending Relative Control 213
Weaknesses / Color
Complexions
Connecting to colored
information
3 2 1
Piece co-ordination and
Space Advantage
Integration over synthesis
Integration over analysis
l 3 2
Tactical Exchanges
Absolute Control
Absolute Control 2 3 1
Endgame transition
Visibility
Visibility 1 3 2
Game Analysis Progressive Baseline 1 3 2
Sum of the Ranks 14 19 18
Table 6: Summary of the Qualitative Assignment of Final Ranks normalized
VI. Discussion
In our experiments, we observed that the visually impaired students relied on the confidence from the
squares. The visually impaired analysis has shown to portray higher confidence over the move selection
was based on such highly localized features of squares, baseline of chessboard and fixed pieces. We
realized that the characteristic feature that the notion of localization should potentially be exploited by the
sighted chess players to understand the position. The sighted students connect to the current baseline
inherently from the visually impaired analysis than relying on the features in the chessboard that leads to
newer synthesis. This stabilizes the progress in the visually impaired. However in the case of visually
impaired, the students are able to overcome the conflict of touch stimuli over the imagination of a
physically present piece not being present in the board. With such observable behaviors, we speculated
that the sighted student would exchange their expectations though discussions to validate their synthesis.
The discussions that were exchanged mostly comprised of the dynamics of the structural features those
were uncertain to exist as permanent formation. Predominately, sighted students enquired on alternate
pawn structure formulation that was aligned with different spatial control. Blind students constantly
enquired the shifting of pieces to different activity. The synergy observed such differently impaired group
was the clarity of decision on retaining pieces. The stability of marriage of pieces and squares were well
understood by the synergic group than by their counter parts. Further sections summarize the response on
the instructional design used in our experiments to study the synergy effect of differently impaired against
the elements of chess described in earlier sections.
A. Explaining the Results
The section 4 gives the instructional design based on which we performed in vivo experiments to
understand the effectiveness of the system. . In general, the first half of experiment explored the reality

elements identified in chess. The blind students were more efficient in directly sensing the reality
elements and they effectively communicated across the group, to make the partners observe the features.
The communication was well established due to the orientation of the students, the discussions were
initiated from the blind student end. During the second half, sighted students had major conflict in the
style of synthesis and the baseline perceived had a significant deviations. The Group A excelled in terms
of the over all stability, as they were well balanced from the communication end and synergy effect was
optimal for the differently impaired group, which met the learning objective of assimilating the positions.
However, the concepts were well assimilated by the visual-impaired students and the ideas exchanged
were reproduced, as observed with Group B. As the degree of imagination increased, the discussion over
progressive depths was much hampered with the visually impaired student. However, sighted group
suffered much difficulty over the style conflict, when subjected communicating complex ideas, within the
allotted time. Frequently, the students ended up arriving at a different baseline that do not explicitly trace
to the current baseline by exploring at greater depth. Such results were mainly due to observation of new
ideas. The sighted students frequency disturbed by the visual disturbances, whose artifacts prevented
them to learn the conclusions derived out of discussions. Towards the end of second half, there was good
stability and progress observed with the synergic group; however, there was higher level of frustration
accumulated with both the sighted and visually impaired group. We attributed two major reasons for such
frustration. Firstly, the style of play of sighted students induced a gradual instability as imagination
component was increased. This resulted in significant deviation towards progress. Secondly apperception
gained by the students in the new environment was corrupted by the frequency and richness of stimuli
they encountered in terms of touch or visual. Circulating the observers and participants frequently
reduced these artifacts.
B. Artifacts of Impulsive Reaction
The impulsive reaction of sighted students due to the availability of the holistic view effortlessly,
frequently disturbed the blind students. Towards the second phase of experiments, when the sighted
players initiated the dialogs, there were minor difficulty encountered by visual-impaired students, to react
to the situation, frequently, either visually impaired impulsively react to the situation. This often brings
frustration to the blind students who have not constructed the position in full. Such artifacts disturb the
rhythm of the experiment. Sighted students encounter similar frustration, after being convinced of getting
a subjective evaluation of the position. However, involving a general discussion of the position and such
observations account for instability negates such artifacts.
C. The Observers’ Angle
Although, observers are passive participants within the position, they play a crucial role in the
experiments. Their observation is compared against the observation of mentors, to gauge the performance
of the mentors. The process with chess players trying to analyze similar positions with one of them just
forced to observe structural features of chess have failed in the case of observers in group C more times
due to the fact that chess would be uninteresting in such case. The mentors measure the impact of this
effect from the observed impatience in the observer of all the groups as compared with Group C.
VII. Conclusion
Thus, we have presented a novel case of accommodating visually impaired students into chess discussion
in such a way that the synergy in the thought process generated by the students excels their counter part.
With such system in practice – The day is not far to accommodate a visually impaired student into school,
at least on a special occasion on regular basis, where the students can be mutually benefited from the
interactions. However, we have identified that the apperception of both visual-impaired and sighted
students, pose a great challenge deploy such system in normal school environment. The measurements
obtained after negating the reactive behavior of students display the intelligent quotient of students with
lesser artifacts.
VIII. Future Work

Presently for the set of experimentation, the student samples were trained in all respects from scratch to
avoid the artifact of earlier training methodologies. We wish to conduct focused classroom activity to
prepare towards thematic tournaments, where the students would predictably evolve in the tournament
setting with specific problem solving and thematic gaming. With such exposure tournament exposure, we
wish to repeat the cycle of experiments with more rigorous examples to understand the role played by our
system in evolving these set of students, in a general classroom environment.
Reference:
[1] Chase, W., and Simon, H. (1973) The mind's eye in chess, in W.G. Chase (ed.), Visual Information Processing, Academic
Press, New York.
[2] de Groot, A. (1978) Thought and Choice in Chess, Mouton, The Hague. (Original work published in 1946).
[3] Charness, N. Reingold, E. M. Pomplun, M. & Stampe, D (2001). The perceptual aspect of skilled performance in chess:
Evidence from eye movements. Memory & Cognition, 29,1146-1152.
[4] Hegarty, M. Haarslev, V. & Narayanan, N. H. (2002). Diagrammatic reasoning. Kuntscliche Intelligenz, 4, 38-39.
[5] Ekstrom, R.B., French, J.W., Harman, H.H., and Dermen, D. (1976) Manual for Factor Referenced Cognitive Tests,
Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.
[6] Elio, R., and Scharf, P. (1990) Modeling novice-to-expert shifts in problem-solving strategy and knowledge organization,
Cognitive Science, 14: 579-640.
[7] Ericsson, K.A.,and Simon, H. (1984) Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, Bradford Books, MIT Press, Cambridge,MA
[8] R Beichner, J M Saul, D S Abbott, J. Morse, Duane Deardorff, Rhett J. Allain, S W Bonham, Melissa Dancy, and
J. Risley, "Student-Centered Activities for Large Enrollment Undergraduate Programs (SCALE-UP) project," in
PER_Based Reform in University Physics, edited by E F Redish and P. J. Cooney (American Association of Physics
Teachers, College Park, MD, In Press).
[9] M Saul, R Beichner, D S Abbott, J. Morse, Duane Deardorff, Rhett J. Allain, S W Bonham, Melissa Dancy, and
J. Risley, "Incorporating active learning in large introductory physics classes: The SCALE-UP Project," Phys. Rev.
ST Phys. Educ. Res. (submitted).
[10] Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. London: Sage.
[12] Galina Andreyeva (1989) , Social Psychology, Progress Publishers.
[13] The graphical user interface: crisis, danger and opportunity. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness.
December, pp.496-502.
[14] Murnion, S. (1996a). A guide to Internet access for visually impaired people. Birmingham: Research Centre for the
Education of the Visually Impaired.
[15] Berry, J. (1999). Apart or apart?: access to the internet by visually impaired and blind people, with particular emphasis on
assistive enabling technology and user perceptions. Information technology and disabilities.
[16] Dillon, A. and Watson, C. (1996). User analysis in HCI: the historical lessons from individual differences
research. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 45, pp. 619-637.
[17] Iain Murray, Helen Armstrong (2004), A computing Education Vision for the Sighted Impaired. Coferenece in Research and
Practice in Information Technology, Vol 30.
[18] IM Jeremy Silman (2001), The Reassess your Chess Workbook, Siles Press,
[19] IM Jeremy Silman, The Ameatur’s Mind,
[20] John Watson,(2001), Strategy in Action, Gamit Publishers
[21] Jonathan Rowson (2005), Chess for Zeebras, Gamit Publishers.
[22] Jonathan Rowson (2001), Seven deadly Chess Sins, Gamit Publishers.
[23] K Murali Mohan (2002), Endless Endings, Capa Chess Books.
[24] K Murali Mohan (2003), Tactical Weapons of World Champions, Capa Chess Books.
[25] K Murali Mohan (2003), Zee-boom-Bah, Capa Chess Books.