The paper reviews the evidence for and against the recognition-association theory and a forward-search (SEEK) theory of chess skill. The recognition-association theory appears to be founded on indirect evidence concerning visual short-term memory, together with supplementary assumptions that may be questioned, and provides no role for verbal processes. There is no direct support for the theory, which omits forward search for reasons that are reexamined. In contrast, the SEEK theory maintains that move choice is based on search and evaluation processes supplemented (or else supplanted) by a knowledge base. These processes are directly evidenced by experimental findings. The objection that search theories cannot account for speed chess is met by a review of the available evidence. It is concluded that chess skill relies on thinking ahead rather than on pattern recognition.

The question has been raised whether an associative mechanism is responsible for the persistence of the McCollough effect. Since current estimates of its rate of decay are derived from procedures in which subjects are repeatedly tested, it was hypothesized that the measured effects might be attenuated by the testing process. Accordingly, a comparison was made between repeated testing and time-elapse testing. A conventional group of 16 subjects had repeated testing at 0, 8, 24, 56, and 120 hr. after induction. Five other groups of 16 were run, each at one of the time delays, with no intervening tests; an additional measure was taken where appropriate at 120 hr. A magenta-green nulling procedure was used to assess the aftereffect. The repeated-test group showed a linear decrease of effect against the stated delays, reaching zero at 120 hr. In contrast, the time-elapse groups showed little decline up to 120 hr. Those groups retested at 120 hr. showed declines due to prior testing. When four more groups were subsequently tested at intervals up to 2,040 hr., the effect remained at better than half strength.

No abstract

No abstract

Previous research has found that the ability to recall briefly presented chess positions varies with playing strength, except when random positions are used. The suggestion therefore arises that mastery consists of recognizing configurations that are associated with plausible moves. This approach is tested by comparing the memory scores and move-choice protocols of players in six skill categories, using random chess positions. Contrary to any strong form of recognitionassociation hypothesis, differences in chess skill are shown to persist although memory differences are abolished. It is further shown that the moves selected are not based on those few pieces that are remembered. Skill-related differences in the accuracy of positional evaluations also occur, but they are less marked than in earlier results. An alternative approach to chess skill seems appropriate, in which memory effects may function at the evaluation phase.