On Memory and Physiological Signals of Experts and Novices-Case Study: Chess

Abstract Chess has been a common research topic for expert-novice studies and thus for learning science as a whole because of its limited framework and longevity as a game. One factor is that chess studies are good at measuring how expert chess players use their memory and skills to approach a new chessboard con�guration. Studies have shown that chess skill is based on memory, speci�cally, "chunks" of chess piece positions that have been previously encountered by players. However, debate exists concerning how these chunks are constructed in players' memory. These chunks could be constructed by proximity of pieces on the chessboard as well as their precise location or constructed through attack-defense relations. The primary objective of this study is to support which one is more in line with chess players' actual chess abilities based off their memory, proximity or attack/defense. This study replicates and extends an experiment conducted by McGregor and Howe (2002), which explored the argument that pieces are primed more by attack and defense relations than by proximity. Like their study, the present study examined novice and expert chess players' response times for correct and error responses by showing slides of game configurations. In addition to these metrics, the present study also incorporated an eye-tracker to measure visual attention and EEG to measure affective and cognitive states. They were added to allow the comparison of subtle and unconscious behaviors of both novices and expert chess players. Overall, most McGregor and Howe's (2002) results were replicated supporting their theory on chess expertise. This included statistically significance for skill in the error rates with the mean error rates on the piece recognition tests were 70.1% for novices and 87.9% for experts, as well as significance for the two-way interaction for relatedness and proximity with error rates of 22.4% for unrelated/far, 18.8% for related/far, 15.8% for unrelated
ear, and 29.3% for related
ear. Unfortunately, there were no statistically significance for any of the response time effects, which McGregor and Howe found for the interaction between skill and proximity. Despite eye-tracking and EEG data not either support nor confirm McGregor and Howe's theory on how chess players memorize chessboard configurations, these metrics did help build a secondary theory on how novices typically rely on proximity to approach chess and new visual problems in general. This was exemplified by the statistically significant results for short-term excitement for the two-way interaction of skill and proximity, where the largest short-term excitement score was between novices on near proximity slides. This may indicate that novices, because they may lean toward using proximity to try to recall these pieces, experience a short burst of excitement when the pieces are close to each other because they are more likely to recall these configurations.