It might happen in the very beginning. Reply to Ericsson

Anique B. H. de Bruin*, Ellen M. Kok, Jimmie Leppink, Gino Camp

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Web of Science)


In his response to criticisms Ericsson argues that conclusions about expertise development cannot be drawn from studies in the general population, and that it is possible that, in chess, intelligence and expertise are uniformly related across development. We respond here that if we want to study the development of expertise across the lifespan, research needs to take into account samples from the general population, such as novices. Moreover, studies in the general population are needed to study a factor that might have troubled previous research in the field and therefore might have implications for current theories of expertise development, which is a possible restriction of range in crucial variables such as intelligence. We argue for a longitudinal, multifaceted approach to study expertise development, starting with unselected samples of novices and taking into account practice, intelligence and motivation simultaneously, to prevent restriction of range and allow for further and stronger conclusions on the relation between intelligence and chess expertise.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)107-108
Publication statusPublished - 2014


  • Chess
  • Intelligence
  • Motivation
  • Deliberate practice
  • Expertise development

Cite this