Bias at the board: implicit gender stereotypes and dual-task effects in chess evaluations

Abstract

Using the Stereotype Content Model (SCM), the research explores whether moves attributed to male versus female players are evaluated differently and investigates how increased cognitive load moderates these biases. Experienced chess players rated the quality of mid-game chess moves attributed to either male or female players. Each move was accompanied by a fictional player’s name and photo. Half of the trials included a dual-task condition requiring participants to count chess pieces while evaluating the moves, introducing additional cognitive load. Ratings were analyzed for bias and accuracy, with gender and dual task as within-subject factors. Moves attributed to male players were rated significantly higher than similar moves attributed to female players, indicating implicit gender bias. However, participants were more accurate in evaluating moves attributed to female players, suggesting heightened scrutiny. Under dual-task conditions, participants demonstrated improved accuracy overall, likely due to the cognitive demands of the secondary task disrupting heuristic-based judgments. Gender-based biases persisted but were less pronounced under dual task conditions. Implicit gender biases influence chess evaluations, with stereotypes about male competence skewing judgments. A dual task disrupted heuristic processing, offering a potential pathway to mitigating biases.