Sala Giovanni, Gobet Fernand
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Bedford Street South, Liverpool, L69 7ZA, UK.
Learn Behav. 2017 Dec;45(4):414-421. doi: 10.3758/s13420-017-0280-3.
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.
有人提出,下棋能让孩子提高数学能力。最近的一项荟萃分析(萨拉和戈贝特,2016年,《教育研究评论》,第18卷,第46 - 57页)对这些说法进行了评估,结果表明下棋组有显著效果。然而,该荟萃分析也表明,大多数被审查的研究采用的实验设计不佳(特别是缺乏一个积极对照组)。我们进行了两项实验,采用三组设计,包括一个积极对照组和一个消极对照组,重点关注数学能力。在第一个实验(N = 233)中,一组三年级和四年级学生接受了25小时的国际象棋教学,并接受了数学问题解决任务测试。参与者还填写了一份问卷,评估他们对数学问题的元认知能力。将下棋组与一个积极对照组(下跳棋)和一个消极对照组进行比较。在测试后,三组在数学问题解决能力或元认知能力方面没有统计学上的显著差异。第二个实验(N = 52)大致采用了相同的设计,但在积极对照组中,用东方的围棋取代了跳棋。虽然接受国际象棋教学的组和消极对照组在数学问题解决方面略优于积极对照组,但差异没有统计学意义。在元认知能力方面没有发现差异。这些结果表明,经过严格测试后,国际象棋教学的效果(如果有)是适度的,而且这种干预不应取代传统的数学课程。