About this video
An LSAT-style passage contrasting how beginners and experts choose chess moves. Beginners reason through consequences, while experts rely mainly on pattern recognition built from recalled prior positions. The question tests whether you can tell what the passage supports from what it only implies or overstates.
You'll be able to
- contrast beginner and expert decision-making in chess as the passage describes it
- identify when an answer choice goes beyond the evidence
- explain why a strong or absolute claim should be treated with suspicion
Key words
- Pattern recognition
- Deciding a move by recognizing a similar position seen before.
- Information recall
- Retrieving what happened after moves chosen in prior, similar positions.
- Consequence analysis
- Working out what will happen after a move, the method beginners rely on.
- Absolute claim
- A strong statement using words like only or only if, which should be checked carefully against the evidence.
Transcript
- Beginners typically decide each chess move by considering the consequences. Expert players, in contrast, primarily use pattern-recognition techniques. That is, such a player recognizes, having been in a similar position before, and makes a decision based on information recalled about the consequences of moves chosen on that prior occasion.
Which of the following is most strongly supported by the information above. Alright now let's look at these. Choice A. Beginning chess players are better at thinking through the consequences of chess moves than experts are. Well that just seems strange as a statement, and if you look at the original information, they just say that beginning players typically decide by, considering the consequences.
They're not saying that beginning chess players are better at considering the consequences, I would actually be surprised if that's the truth. So without even looking at these other choices, I'm feeling pretty good that A is not going to be it, because it's not really supported, it's not saying that beginning chess players are better at thinking through consequences, it's just they rely more on that, than most expert players.
So let me cross this one out. Choice B. A beginning chess player should use pattern-recognition techniques when deciding what move to make. That one doesn't feel right either, because remember the pattern-recognition techniques that experts do, they are relying on information recalled about the consequences of moves chosen on that prior occasion.
But a beginning chess player isn't going to have all of that experience. They're not going to have all of that memory, and that information recall. So, it doesn't make sense, or it's not supported by the information here, for them to primarily use pattern-recognition techniques.
So I'll rule that one out, I'll rule that one out as well. I'll rule this first one out as well. Okay, so this last, choice C. One's chess skills will improve only if one learns to use pattern-recognition techniques. So this one is interesting, 'cause what are they saying, they're saying expert players, in contrast, primarily use pattern-recognition techniques.
So this ones interesting, this one feels close, but let's look at the other choices 'cause this is saying, improve only if. Well, we're not even saying, whether you want to become an expert, we're talking about whether you want to improve, and in general whenever you see a really strong statement like this I tend to become a little bit skeptical.
This is like, only if, only if one learns to use pattern-recognition techniques. We're not even saying that you want to become an expert, you just need to improve. And I would assume that your chess skills will improve just by playing more, by even getting better at, these beginner considering the consequences.
The only way to improve isn't through pattern-recognition techniques, that's not implied by this information here. So talking through it a little bit, I feel good about ruling this one out as well. In playing chess, an expert player relies crucially on his or her memory.
This is interesting, they're telling us, expert players primarily use pattern-recognition techniques. That is such a player recognizes, that seems like memory, recognizes having been in a similar position before, and makes a decision based on the information recalled, about the consequences of the moves.
So if we're talking about information recall, recognizing things based on previous similar positions, information recall, this does look like they are relying crucially, on their memory. So this one's looking good, let's look at this last choice. Any chess player who played other games that require pattern-recognition skills, would thereby improve his or her chess skills.
They haven't made that claim in this information above, that doesn't seem supported at all. Experts do use pattern-recognition, but it says nothing about how well you can port those pattern-recognition skills from one game to another. So I would rule that one out as well, and I would pick choice D.
Video © Khan Academy, used under CC BY-NC-SA. Watch on Khan Academy. Puzzicle is not affiliated with Khan Academy.