Does chess instruction improve mathematical problem-solving ability? Two experimental studies with an active control group

Abstract

It has been proposed that playing chess enables children to improve their ability in mathematics. These claims have been recently evaluated in a meta-analysis (Sala & Gobet, 2016, Educational Research Review, 18, 46–57), which indicated a significant effect in favor of the groups playing chess. However, the meta-analysis also showed that most of the reviewed studies used a poor experimental design (in particular, they lacked an active control group). We ran two experiments that used a three-group design including both an active and a passive control group, with a focus on mathematical ability. In the first experiment (N = 233), a group of third and fourth graders was taught chess for 25 hours and tested on mathematical problem-solving tasks. Participants also filled in a questionnaire assessing their meta-cognitive ability for mathematics problems. The group playing chess was compared to an active control group (playing checkers) and a passive control group. The three groups showed no statistically significant difference in mathematical problem-solving or metacognitive abilities in the posttest. The second experiment (N = 52) broadly used the same design, but the Oriental game of Go replaced checkers in the active control group. While the chess-treated group and the passive control group slightly outperformed the active control group with mathematical problem solving, the differences were not statistically significant. No differences were found with respect to metacognitive ability. These results suggest that the effects (if any) of chess instruction, when rigorously tested, are modest and that such interventions should not replace the traditional curriculum in mathematics.

The effectiveness of intervention with board games: a systematic review

“…This category included board games such as Go, Ska, and chess, and the effect sizes (Cohen’s d) between pre- and post-tests of cognitive function ranged from 0.04 to 2.60 and − 1.14 to − 0.02. The effect size of the exacerbation was calculated in only the chess group of Sala et al [27]. The effect sizes (Cohen’s d) between the mean gain of the main intervention group and the other groups ranged from 0.06 to 2.36 and − 1.38 to − 0.22.…”

Non-verbal IQ Gains from Relational Operant Training Explain Variance in Educational Attainment: An Active-Controlled Feasibility Study

“…Finally, from stages 41-47 (the highest stage reached), they gained five tickets per stage. At the same time, those in the control condition were allowed to play online chess on the school iPads during the same period, as this was already part of the school curriculum and was previously hypothesized to be a useful cognitive training in its own right (Sala & Gobet, 2017a). We measured all participants' NVIQ before and after SMART/chess training.…”

“…Moreover, putative reports of near and far transfer of working memory training have typically failed to replicate under stringent conditions (e.g., Chooi & Thompson, 2012;Colom & Román, 2018;Colom et al, 2013;Fissler et al, 2017;Hilbert et al, 2017;Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013, 2016Melby-Lervåg, Redick, & Hulme, 2016;Schwaighofer, Fischer, & Bühner, 2015;Shipstead, Redick, & Engle, 2012;Stephenson & Halpern, 2013;Thompson et al, 2013). In a similar fashion, chess (Sala & Gobet, 2017a), video games (Sala et al, 2018;Simons et al, 2016), music (Sala & Gobet, 2017c), and compensatory education (McKey, 1985) are all strategies that have failed to raise general cognitive ability, leading many to the general conclusion that "brain training doesn't work" (Kassai et al, 2019;Sala & Gobet, 2019). However, one might argue that most of these approaches are quite theoretically imprecise and perhaps unlikely to work in the first place, highlighting the need for a cogent theory of language and cognition when conceptualizing cognitive training interventions.…”

“…We chose chess as the control condition as chess has previously been used for cognitive training (cf. Sala & Gobet, 2017a). We hypothesized that training effects would transfer towards examinations that depended on participants' performance on the day (e.g., reading comprehension) and less so for those that depend more heavily on participants having successfully availed of prior learning opportunities (e.g., mathematics).…”

Cognitive training: A Field in Search of a Phenomenon

“…Sala and Gobet 2020b;Sala et al 2019a;Aksayli et al 2019), video-game playing(Sala et al 2018), exergames(Sala et al 2019c) and music training (Sala and Gobet 2017c; Sala and Gobet 2020a). The exception is chess(Sala and Gobet 2016), where too few studies with an active control group have been carried out; however, even with chess, the few available studies with an active control group point in the direction of a lack of far transfer (e.g.,Sala and Gobet 2017a).Cognitive training: Methodological and substantive issues 14…”