ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Expertise-dependent visuocognitive performance of chess players in mating tasks: evidence from eye movements during task processing.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Visuocognitive performance is closely related to expertise in chess and has been scrutinized by several investigations in the last decades. The results indicate that experts' decision-making benefits from the chunking process, perception and visual strategies. Despite numerous studies which link these concepts, most of these investigations have employed common research designs that do not use real chess play, but create artificial laboratory conditions via screen-based chess stimuli and obtrusive stationary eye tracking with or without capturing of decision-making or virtual reality settings. Methods: The present study assessed the visuocognitive performance of chess novices, intermediates and experts in a real chess setting. Instead of check detection, find-the-best-move tasks or to distinguish between regions of a chessboard that were relevant or irrelevant to the best move in previous studies, we introduced n-mate tasks and sequentially manipulated their difficulty. Due to the complexity of the tasks, we monitored players' visual strategies in a fine-graded initial phase (different time intervals instead of analysing a fixed number of first fixations) of task-solving and for complete trials, employing non-obtrusive mobile eye tracking, multi-sensor observation and full-automatic annotation of decision-making. Results: The results revealed significant expertise-dependent differences in visuocognitive performance based on a circumstantial spatial and temporal analysis. In order to provide more detailed results, for the first time the analyses were performed under the special consideration of different time intervals and spatial scalings. In summary, experts showed a significantly higher number of fixations on areas of interest and empty squares between pieces in the task processing than less-skilled players. However, they had a strikingly low total number of fixations on the whole board and in complete trials. Discussion: As a conclusion, experts apply different visual search strategies in problem-solving. Moreover, experts' visuocognitive processing benefits from stored chunks of mating constellations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.