No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Recognition of Expertise in Chess Players
Abstract
What kinds of information facilitate the identification of expert performance? How well can chess players of different performance levels identify the level of players who produced a chess position, or the moves leading to it? Fifteen chess players with U.S. Chess Federation (USCF) ratings from 1300 to 2210 judged six unfamiliar chess positions taken from games between players with USCF ratings from 1400 to 2600. The moves immediately preceding the starting position were successively revealed, with rating and confidence estimations made at each move. Estimation error decreased as a function of number of moves revealed (p < .001). Higher rated players consistently made lower estimation errors (p < .01). Judges at all personal levels were more accurate about positions arising between players close in rating to themselves. A self-reference heuristic is proposed in which estimation of expertise is made relative to the judge's own projected performance.
... The proof for part (a) of Fact 3 follows from the definition of LFE, and the proof of part (b) is in Appendix A. Fact 3 captures the flavor of findings from Reynolds (1992) and Rampal (2020). ...
... Similar to (a), Reynolds (1992) found that the estimation error about the opponent's ELO rating (as a chess player) decreased as a function of number of moves revealed. Rampal (2020) reports a similar finding that the accuracy of beliefs about opponent's experience-level improve as more moves of the opponent are revealed. ...
... In both these cases, the number of preceding stages observed increases, which increases the total number of stages observed (NSO). Further, similar to Fact Reynolds (1992) found that "Higher rated (chess) players consistently made lower estimation errors" (of other chess players' ELO ratings), which would follow if ELO rating captured foresight. ...
This paper models a scenario where finite perfect-information games are distorted in two ways. First, each player can have different possible levels of foresight, where foresight is a particular number of future stages that the player can observe/understand from each of her moves. In particular, each player's foresight is allowed to be “limited” or insufficient to observe the entire game from each move. Second, there is uncertainty about each opponent's foresight. I define the Limited Foresight Equilibrium (LFE) for this model. An LFE specifies how limited-foresight players' strategies and beliefs about opponents' foresight evolve as they move through the stages of the game. I show the existence of LFE and describe its other properties. I show that in LFE limited-foresight players follow simple heuristics for beliefs and actions. As applications, LFE is shown to rationalize experimental findings on Sequential Bargaining and the Centipede game.
... Fact 3 captures the flavor of findings from Reynolds (1992) and Rampal (2018). Similar to (a), Reynolds (1992) found that estimation error about the opponent's ELO rating (as a chess player) decreased as a function of number of moves revealed. ...
... Fact 3 captures the flavor of findings from Reynolds (1992) and Rampal (2018). Similar to (a), Reynolds (1992) found that estimation error about the opponent's ELO rating (as a chess player) decreased as a function of number of moves revealed. Rampal (2018) reports a similar finding that beliefs about opponent's experience-level improve as more moves of the opponent are revealed. ...
... In both these cases, the number of preceding stages observed increases, which increases the total number of stages observed (NSO). Further, similar to Fact 3(b), Reynolds (1992) that the second-stage LFE belief of 0 2 , after observing I1 in the first-stage, can be µ 0 2 = (0, 1 2 , 1 2 ) over {0 1 , 1 1 , 2 1 } (derived from the SE of M CG(2) depicted in Figure 4). However, in any LFE, 0 1 , 1 1 , and 2 1 , choose I1 with probabilities 0, 0, and 1, respectively. ...
This paper models the scenario where players in a finite perfect-information game can have heterogeneous foresight-levels, and the players are uncertain about their opponents’ foresight-levels. Foresight-level is defined as the number of subsequent stages that a player can observe/understand from a given move. We define the Limited Foresight Equilibrium (LFE), which provides an assessment for this model and makes outcome predictions given a distribution over players’ foresight-levels. We show the existence of LFE. In LFE, within a single play of the game, as play proceeds, the perception of the game changes for players with limited-foresight; they update beliefs about opponents’ foresights and adjust strategies to maximize payoff within their foresight bound. The LFE beliefs of players with higher foresight-level are consistent regarding more opponent-types. Players with given foresight-levels cannot distinguish among different higher-foresight types of a player, but if they observe actions that are impossible according to lower-foresight opponents’ LFE strategies, then they discover that some opponent has higher-foresight. LFE strategies take reputation effects into account. In applications, LFE is shown to rationalize experimental findings on Sequential Bargaining and the Centipede game. We discuss experimental findings from Rampal (2018) corroborating LFE’s predictions using race games.
... This study of Grabner, et al., again, supports the claim of Simon and which states that performance improves as a consequence of continued experience and deliberate practice (Ericsson, 2002). Reynolds (1992), in his study on the Recognition of expertise in chess players, focused on expert performance and its recognition of chess players in different skill levels through self -reference heuristic or making the players judge and estimate the ratings of those chess players who created certain chess positions. They were also asked to rate their confidence to their judgment. ...
... Operationally, it was assessed through a test design called the thinkaloud protocol which can create assessments using elements of the universal design framework (Johnstone, 2003). According to Thompson, Johnstone, and Thurlow (2006) (Reynolds, 1992). Operationally, in this study, an expert pertained to chess players with an ELO rating of 1800 -2000, 2100 -2300, and 2400 -2600. ...
Nine (9) expert chess players with an ELO rating ranging from 1800 to 2600 were asked to verbally report their solution, evaluation, and judgment towards chess board puzzles intended to measure one's tactical ability, positional judgment, and endgame knowledge respectively. The goal of this study was to find out the differences of chess-specific verbal knowledge among expert chess players of different skill levels through think-aloud protocol. The verbal reports gathered were subjected to content analysis.
... Для преодоления ограничений, связанных с «эффектом переноса» для внутрисубъектных переменных, нами использована процедура частичного позиционного уравнивания. Она подразумевает случайную последовательность демонстрации виньеток для каждого респондента (Reynolds 1992). С целью обеспечения эквивалентности групп респондентов критичной для исследований с включением межсубъектных субъективных переменных использована процедура уравнивания, что выражается в корректировке собранных данных с учетом необходимых квот по каждому из признаков. ...
Социокультурные изменения и технологические новации заставляют пересмотреть привычные социальные классификации и включить в поле рассмотрения социологии объекты, которые порождены научно-техническим прогрессом. В частности, это относится к материализованным неосоциальным субъектам, которых называют «социальными роботами» и которые могут проявляться в материальной и нематериальной формах. К субъектам взаимодействия можно отнести всевозможных голосовых помощников, чат-боты, социальных роботов, которые порой задействуются в социальной интеракции подобно людям. Наше исследование — попытка раскрыть особенности восприятия людьми появление особых интеллектуальных систем — социальных роботов в повседневных ситуациях. Первая часть статьи посвящена обзору основных теоретических подходовв социологии к изучению взаимодействия робота и человека с акцентом на барьеры и страхи такого взаимодействия. Затем описывается методология исследования, которой стал факторный опрос с помощью метода виньеток, представляющий собой вымышленное краткое описание определенного объекта, индивида или ситуации, куда заложены систематически варьирующиеся экспериментальныефакторы. Участие в исследовании приняли студенты московских вузов в возрасте от 18 лет. По результатам исследования восприятие взаимодействия человека и робота опосредовано рядом социокультурных феноменов, сохранялась тенденция на более высокие оценки допустимости гуманоидного робота в любых ситуациях, но также заметен и контраст оценок в зависимости от ситуации для андроидного робота. Исследование позволило комплексно оценить важность факторов в восприятии неоморфных субъектов, наиболее часто упоминаемых в тематических научных публикациях. Потенциальная научная ценность работы заключается в широте охвата разнообразных факторов и апробации метода факторного опроса для оценки восприятия взаимодействия с неоморфными субъектами на примере роботов. Результаты исследования могут стать для разработчиков практическим ориентиром, как сделать социальные интерфейсы более приемлемыми и понятными для людей — в этом потенциальная практическая ценность работы.
... Additionally, players of all levels were more accurate in identifying the strategies unfolding between players close in rating to themselves. This research supports the existence of cognitive schemas and demonstrates that experts using schemas at the same level of abstraction provide most insight into each other's assessment of the situation (Reynolds, 1992). ...
Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) have become one of the deadliest threats to military personnel, resulting in over 50% of American combat casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. Identification of IED emplacement is conducted by mission payload operators (MPOs). Yet, experienced MPOs are limited in number, making MPO training a critical intervention. In this article, we implement a Cognitive Engineering Based on Expert Skill methodology to better understand how experienced MPOs identify the emplacement of IEDs for the purposes of improving training. First, expert knowledge was elicited through interviews and questionnaires to identify the types of perceptual cues used and how these cues are cognitively processed. Results indicate that there are many different static and dynamic cues that interact with each other over time and space. Using data from the interviews and questionnaires, an empirically grounded framework is presented that explains the cognitive process of IED emplacement detection. Using the overall findings and the framework, IED emplacement training scenarios were developed and built into a simulation.
... Recently, Howard (1999Howard ( , 2001Howard ( , 2005 even interpreted the observation that the mean age of world-class chess players is progressively declining in the past decades as real-world evidence that human intelligence is rising (a view that has been severely criticised by Gobet, Campitelli, & Waters, 2002; see also Charness & Gerchak, 1996). In contrast to most other expertise domains, chess oVers the great advantage of providing an objective and valid indicator of the players' expertise levels, viz. the ELO ranking system (Elo, 1978; see also Charness, 1992;Reynolds, 1992). ELO rankings typically range from 1200 (for a beginner in tournament chess) to the world champion's ranking of about 2800. ...
... Chess therefore lends itself to studies in thinking and problem solving. For this reason chess has frequently been a tool for psychological research into human thinking and expertise (Charness 1981, Chase and Simon 1973a, 1973b, de Groot 1965, 1978, Finkelstein and Markovitch 1998, McGregor and Howes 2002, Gobet and Jansen 1994, Jongman 1968, Reynolds 1992, Saariluoma 1998, Simon and Barenfield 1969, Simon and Gilmartin 1973. ...
... Holding (1989) emphasized search and evaluation, emphasizing the increase in accuracy in evaluating possible future positions with increasing skill. Reynolds (1992) also emphasized search, arguing that experts attend to more focused parts of the chess board and that their superior memory for chess positions is largely limited to these focal portions examined during search. Hassebrock et al. (1993) reported a similar finding in another domain. ...
Research on the higher mental processes throughout the history of The American Journal of Psychology is reviewed. The domains covered include reasoning, judgment and decision, problem solving, and metacognition. Within each domain, the earliest contributions to the Journal are discussed, as is the development of the research domain over time. The increasing refinement of research methods and theoretical tools over time is accompanied by much consistency in research questions.
... Therefore, the goal of the present study is to investigate the interaction between intelligence and an elaborate knowledge base more thoroughly in the cognitively demanding domain of chess expertise. This domain not only provides well-established experimental paradigms but thanks to the ELO system also an objective and precise indicator for the assessment of the individuals' level of expert knowledge [22,87]. To cover a broad range of cognitive demands, three types of tasks with chess material are employed, drawing on central components of information processing (mental speed, memory, and reasoning). ...
Superior cognitive performance can be viewed from an intelligence perspective, emphasising general properties of the human information processing system (such as mental speed and working memory), and from an expertise perspective, highlighting the indispensable role of elaborated domain-specific knowledge and acquired skills. In exploring its neurophysiological basis, recent research has provided considerable evidence of the neural efficiency hypothesis of intelligence, indicating lower and more focussed brain activation in brighter individuals. The present EEG study investigates the impacts of intelligence and expertise on cognitive performance and the accompanying cortical activation patterns in the domain of tournament chess. Forty-seven tournament chess players of varying intelligence and expertise level worked on tasks drawing on mental speed, memory, and reasoning. Half of the tasks were representative for chess, while the other half was not. The cortical activation was quantified by means of event-related desynchronisation (ERD) in the upper alpha band. Independent effects of expertise and intelligence emerged at both, the performance and the neurophysiological level. Brighter participants performed better than less intelligent ones which was associated with more efficient brain functioning (lower ERD) across all tasks. Additionally, a high expertise level was beneficial for good task performance but exerted a topographically differentiated influence on the cortical activation patterns. The findings suggest that superior cognitive performance and the underlying cortical activation are not only a function of knowledge and domain-specific competences but also of the general efficiency of the information processing system.
... Recently, Howard (1999Howard ( , 2001Howard ( , 2005 even interpreted the observation that the mean age of world-class chess players is progressively declining in the past decades as real-world evidence that human intelligence is rising (a view that has been severely criticised by Gobet, Campitelli, & Waters, 2002; see also Charness & Gerchak, 1996). In contrast to most other expertise domains, chess oVers the great advantage of providing an objective and valid indicator of the players' expertise levels, viz. the ELO ranking system (Elo, 1978; see also Charness, 1992;Reynolds, 1992). ELO rankings typically range from 1200 (for a beginner in tournament chess) to the world champion's ranking of about 2800. ...
Starting from controversies over the role of general individual characteristics (especially intelligence) for the attainment of expert performance levels, a comprehensive psychometric investigation of individual differences in chess expertise is presented. A sample of 90 adult tournament chess players of varying playing strengths (1311-2387 ELO) was screened with tests on intelligence and personality variables; in addition, experience in chess play, tournament participation, and practice activities were assessed. Correlation and regression analyses revealed a clear-cut moderate relationship between general (and in particular numerical) intelligence and the participants' playing strengths, suggesting that expert chess play does not stand in isolation from superior mental abilities. The strongest predictor of the attained expertise level, however, was the participants' chess experience which highlights the relevance of long-term engagement for the development of expertise. Among all analysed personality dimensions, only domain-specific performance motivation and emotion expression control incrementally contributed to the prediction of playing strength. In total, measures of chess experience, current tournament activity, intelligence, and personality accounted for about 55% of variance in chess expertise. The present results suggest that individual differences in chess expertise are multifaceted and cannot be reduced to differences in domain experience.
Board games have long fascinated as mirrors of intelligence, skill, cunning, and wisdom. While board games have been the topic of many scientific studies, and have been studied for more than a century by psychologists, there was until now no single volume summarizing psychological research into board games. This book, which is the first systematic study of psychology and board games, covers topics such as perception, memory, problem solving and decision making, development, intelligence, emotions, motivation, education, and neuroscience. It also briefly summarizes current research in artificial intelligence aiming at developing computers playing board games, and critically discusses how current theories of expertise fare with board games. Finally, it shows that the information provided by board-game research — both data and theories — have a wider relevance for the understanding of human psychology in general.
website: http://www.tandfebooks.com/isbn/9780203503638
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.