Chess therapy · Atlas

1. Introduction

Version followed: this guide uses two versions side by side, because "chess therapy" is a loose label rather than one manualised therapy. Strand A is relational/psychodynamic chess in individual therapy: the therapist plays chess with the client, as in the Fleming and Strong adolescent case (Psychoanalytic Review 30, 1943) and the case-study book Chess Therapy by Fadul and Canlas (2009; 2nd ed. 2010). Strand B is chess-based cognitive remediation training (CB-CRT), a group method. It follows the ECAM method of Juan A. Montero, as used in Montero, Fuentes and Muñoz-Villena (2026) and in the Central Institute of Mental Health (CIMH) Mannheim trials, which are described in Seeger et al.'s 2025 preprint. Strand C covers chess-derived metaphors and activities inside established therapies: the ACT chessboard metaphor (Hayes, Strosahl and Wilson, 1999), and chess used as a distraction skill in DBT. Only publisher and seller descriptions of the Fadul and Canlas book are drawn on, so Strand A relies on secondary summaries [uncertain]. [source: Wikipedia "Chess therapy"; PEP-Web abstract; City of Asylum/Alibris book listings; Montero et al. 2026; Seeger et al. 2025 medRxiv]

What it is. Chess therapy uses chess, played between therapist and client(s), to build the relationship, support assessment and help healing. Some sources class it as a creative therapy [source: Wikipedia]. Other sources describe it as using the game to build trust, gain insight and change behaviour, mostly in children and adults who struggle socially [source: Theravive]. Histories credit the 9th–10th-century physician Rhazes with using chess positions as metaphors for patients' life situations. That history comes only from secondary sources [uncertain]. [source: Wikipedia; Theravive]

How change is thought to happen.

Strand A. Play is a rule-bound, non-retaliatory place where impulses come out: hostility, dominance, fear of losing. In that space the client can show these impulses, the therapist can observe them, and the two can talk about them. In Fleming and Strong's schizoid 16-year-old, chess gave a safe outlet for hostile impulses and opened talk about feelings, fantasies and dreams. Because it was "only a game", the boy kept some conscious control over his emotions. [source: Wikipedia summary of Fleming & Strong]
Strand B. Structured chess tasks exercise attention, working memory, perception, planning, inhibition and decision-making. Alongside the tasks, psychoeducation and metacognitive talk aim to carry these skills over to everyday life, for example to resisting craving. The authors say this carry-over still needs empirical support. [source: Seeger et al. 2025; Montero et al. 2026]
Strand C. The board is a metaphor for the observing self, which holds thoughts and feelings without fighting them. [source: Contextual Science ACT summary; Providence handout]

Evidence status, as sources state it.

One author writes that chess is not an established evidence-based treatment for any mental health condition, and that there is "not enough evidence to recommend chess as a treatment" [source: Gerlach 2024, Psychology Today].
The CIMH studies are quasi-randomised pilot or early-stage trials. In adults with alcohol use disorder they report better sustained attention and quality of life than controls. In 13–17-year-olds in psychiatric care they report better working memory and well-being than controls. The researchers call for larger studies. [source: CIMH news 27 Aug 2026]
The ECAM prison and therapeutic-community study (n=24) found mostly non-significant differences. The one significant finding was less self-criticism after ECAM. The authors themselves caution that their conclusions go beyond the data. [source: Montero et al. 2026]
Small studies of chess in ADHD, autism and older adults are summarised as limited and mixed [source: Gerlach 2024].

Professional frame. No regulated profession, protected title, registration body or credential exists for "chess therapy" [source: Theravive notes no professional category; no training body found]. Use it only within your existing licensed scope, for example as a registered psychologist, counsellor or psychotherapist, or within APT/BAPT/PTUK play-therapy training when the clients are children [synthesis].

The Fadul and Canlas book warns against using the game for therapy without trained, expert guidance [source: City of Asylum book listing].
ECAM groups are run by instructors trained specifically in the ECAM method [source: Montero et al. 2026]. No public curriculum or certification route was found [uncertain]. Do not present yourself as an "ECAM" practitioner without that training.
Chess classes in schools and prisons are education, not therapy (see §2).

2. Framework

Strand A: individual relational chess. No published phase model was found [uncertain]. The outline below is a working structure [synthesis]:

Engagement (about sessions 1–3). Goal: alliance, and a sense of the client's play style. Criterion to move on: the client comes willingly and some talk happens around the game.
Working phase (open-ended). Goal: link moments in the game to the client's patterns, such as risk-taking, impulsivity, reactions under pressure and handling defeat (dimensions listed by Theravive and in the book description). Criterion to move on: the client can reflect on a game event and relate it to life.
Consolidation and ending. Goal: the client uses the board less, talks directly more, and reviews gains.

Format: usually one board within an ordinary 50-minute session. Chess may fill part of the session or alternate with talk. One author keeps a travel set in the office and uses it alongside evidence-based treatment, not as a standalone intervention [source: Gerlach 2024].

Strand B: CB-CRT/ECAM group. Published formats:

Adults with alcohol use disorder in residential rehabilitation (Germany). 12 group sessions of 90 minutes, twice weekly for 6 weeks, run by one clinical staff member as an add-on to usual treatment. Completion was defined as attending at least 50% of sessions. [source: Seeger et al. 2025]
Prison and therapeutic community (Extremadura, Spain). 2 sessions a week of 90 minutes for 6 months [source: Montero et al. 2026].
Adolescents aged 13–17 in child and adolescent psychiatry. Added to regular therapy over 6 weeks. The session count was not given in the source opened [source: CIMH news; uncertain].
Across settings. No prior chess knowledge is needed, and tasks are adapted to level and age. Equipment is a wall-mounted or demonstration board plus paper and pencil. ECAM has been used with older adults, autistic people, people with ADHD, people with Down syndrome, and adults with mental health or substance use disorders. [source: Montero et al. 2026]

Session structure, in this order [source: Seeger et al. 2025; Montero et al. 2026]:

Psychoeducation on the cognitive function being trained, and in addiction settings its link to craving and staying abstinent.
Exercises of rising difficulty.
Metacognitive discussion: thinking aloud, and reflecting on the processes used.
Work on emotional self-regulation dynamics.

Progression criteria beyond "increasing difficulty" are not published [uncertain]. A practical rule is to move up a level when most of the group solves a task type without prompting, and to drop down when frustration rises [synthesis].

Strand C. The ACT chessboard metaphor is a single intervention used in self-as-context work. It usually takes 10–20 minutes, inside an ACT course of treatment [source: Contextual Science summary; timing synthesis].

Not therapy. School and extracurricular chess programmes, such as twice-weekly 90-minute classes for 6–16-year-olds, are education. Their reported gains are the authors' own quasi-experimental findings [source: ChessBase/Tenerife study]. A psychotherapist can refer a client to such a programme or a chess club as an activity, but should keep it clearly separate from therapy [synthesis].

3. Guiding principles

Chess is the vehicle, not the goal. Winning and chess skill matter only for what they show and train. Practical meaning: adjust your strength, or play non-competitive tasks, to suit the therapeutic aim. [source: Montero et al. 2026 contrast ECAM with tactical/strategic chess; Strand A synthesis]
The game is a safe container for strong impulses. Practical meaning: let aggression, dominance and fear of losing show up on the board, then name them gently. [source: Wikipedia on Fleming & Strong; compensation idea]
Observe how they play, not only what they say. Practical meaning: note risk tolerance, impulsivity, behaviour under pressure and response to defeat. [source: Theravive; book description]
Observations are hypotheses, not diagnoses. Practical meaning: never record a play style as evidence of a disorder. Treat observations only as material to explore together. [synthesis; no validated chess-based assessment found]
Talk can happen beside the game. Some clients, particularly neurodivergent ones, seem more willing to talk while playing. Practical meaning: allow side-by-side talk and do not force eye contact. [source: Gerlach 2024]
No chess knowledge required (Strand B). Practical meaning: give beginners an orientation handout, and design tasks that do not need playing strength. [source: Seeger et al. 2025; Montero et al. 2026]
Social reinforcement over competition (Strand B). Practical meaning: the whole group applauds each person who presents at the demo board, right or wrong. [source: Seeger et al. 2025; Montero et al. 2026]
Make thinking visible (metacognition). Practical meaning: ask clients to think aloud and to name the mental process they used. [source: Seeger et al. 2025; Montero et al. 2026]
Bridge to life. Practical meaning: end each task by asking where the same skill or pattern shows up outside. The source authors say this transfer is a stated aim that still needs proof. [source: Montero et al. 2026]
Integrate, don't replace. Practical meaning: use chess alongside an evidence-based treatment plan, never instead of it. [source: Gerlach 2024; CIMH trials as add-on]
Theory is the therapist's frame, not the game's. Psychoanalytic, Jungian, Gestalt, logotherapy and CBT readings of chess all exist. Practical meaning: use the frame you are trained in, and say which one you are using. [source: Wikipedia; Theravive]
Respect choice. Practical meaning: the client can always decline chess, stop a game, or switch to talk. [synthesis]

4. Intervention inventory

This inventory has three parts: A1–A9 cover individual relational chess, B1–B9 the group chess-based cognitive training, and C1–C2 chess inside ACT and DBT. All example language is illustrative unless it is quoted and cited. Where the sources name a technique but give no procedure, the steps below are marked [synthesis].

Before any strand: safety and set-up [synthesis unless cited]

Choking. Use large pieces, or a wall or magnetic demonstration board, with young children and with anyone who has dementia, pica or a cognitive impairment.
Hygiene. Clean pieces between clients.
Throwing. With clients prone to aggression, use a board and pieces that won't hurt if thrown, and seat people so the exits are clear.
Wall boards. Fix a wall-mounted board securely [source for wall board: Montero et al. 2026].
Access. Give large-print or tactile sets to clients with low vision.

Children and adolescents (all strands) [synthesis unless cited]

Consent. Get written informed consent from the parent or carer, and the child's own assent, explained in words the child understands. Make clear that the child may stop playing at any time.
Confidentiality. Explain what you will share with carers, and the safeguarding limits.
Disclosures. Disclosures made during play trigger the same safeguarding and mandatory-reporting duties as any other disclosure. Duties differ by country, state and profession, so follow the law and procedure where you practise (in England, Working Together to Safeguard Children), record the child's own words, and do not interview them further.
Play is not evidence. Never treat game behaviour, such as aggressive attacks or sacrificing the king, as evidence of abuse.
Carers. Agree with parents how much of the chess work to share. Offer carer sessions or home games with guidance on handling winning and losing.
Touch. Chess needs no physical contact. Keep to brief, ordinary contact such as an offered handshake at the end of a game, let the child decline it, follow your service's touch policy, and never any sexual touch. [synthesis]
Adapting for age. For under-8s, use simplified mini-games: pawns only, or a single piece type. Adolescents in psychiatric care have taken part in a 6-week add-on programme [source: CIMH news].

A1. Chess as alliance-builder

Purpose / when. Engaging clients who are withdrawn, mistrustful, adolescent or neurodivergent, who find face-to-face talk hard. Fleming and Strong used chess with an isolated adolescent to build rapport and work on relationship goals [source: Gerlach 2024; Wikipedia]. One author reports it can lift anxiety and build alliance [source: Gerlach 2024].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Offer chess as one option among several.
2. Ask about their experience and preferred level.
3. Play at a level that keeps the game close. Don't crush them, and don't throw games so obviously that they notice.
4. Keep commentary light. Let silences be.
5. In the last 10 minutes, leave the board and check in.
Example language (illustrative): "We can play while we talk, or just play. You choose."
Watch for / working when: they come willingly, they start making spontaneous comments during games, and the talk gradually drifts from the board to their life.

A2. Observational assessment of play style

Purpose / when. Early sessions, to form hypotheses about risk tolerance, impulsivity, reactions under pressure and handling of defeat [source: Theravive]. One book description says a series of games can help assess risk-taking, concentration, clarity of thought and changes of perspective [source: City of Asylum book listing].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Play 2–3 games without intervening.
2. Afterwards, note: speed of moves; touch-move impulsivity; reckless attacks versus excessive caution; how they respond to losing a piece, going behind, or winning; any rule-bending.
3. Look for patterns that repeat across games.
4. Share one tentative observation and ask whether it fits their life.
Example language (illustrative): "I noticed you moved faster after you lost your queen. Does that happen elsewhere when things go wrong?"
Watch for. No validated scoring system for chess-based assessment was found. Treat what you see as clinical observation only, not a diagnostic test [synthesis]. Playing strength and familiarity with the game strongly shape style.

A3. Talking while playing: processing feelings, fantasies, dreams

Purpose / when. With guarded clients for whom the game lowers the pressure, as in Fleming and Strong's adolescent, who began talking about feelings, fantasies and dreams [source: Wikipedia].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Keep the game going.
2. When affect shows (a groan, a boast, a long pause), reflect it briefly.
3. Follow any associations the client offers.
4. Pause the game if the material deepens.
Example language (illustrative): "That knight's under pressure. What's going through your mind right now?"
Watch for / working when: associations start to move from the board to people and events in the client's life.

A4. Non-retaliatory outlet for aggression (compensation)

Purpose / when. With clients who have hostile or dominance impulses, such as aggressive youth or a schizoid adolescent. Chess lets them express those impulses in a rule-bound way that the therapist does not retaliate against [source: Wikipedia; Theravive]. The "compensation" view treats chess as a socially acceptable target for aggression, such as a chess piece instead of a boss [source: Wikipedia].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Let the client attack freely within the rules.
2. Do not punish aggressive play with crushing counterplay.
3. Name the energy with interest, not judgement.
4. Later, link it to situations where the same impulse causes trouble.
Example language (illustrative): "You went straight for my king. You like to take charge when you can."
Watch for. If anger spills off the board (throwing pieces, threats), stop the game and use your usual behavioural limits.

A5. Psychoanalytic reading of games (wishful, anxiety and punitive games)

Purpose / when. For psychodynamically trained therapists. Here games are treated as wish fulfilment and sorted into wishful, anxiety and punitive games, the punitive game standing for the mind's censoring part [source: Wikipedia]. The primary psychoanalytic texts are not drawn on [uncertain].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. After a game, consider what kind it was. A wishful game is a triumphant fantasy. An anxiety game shows frozen or defensive play. A punitive game is self-sabotage, such as blundering when winning.
2. Hold the hypothesis privately.
3. Interpret only when the client is ready, and tentatively.
Example language (illustrative): "You had it won, then gave away the queen. I wonder if winning feels risky somehow."
Watch for. Don't over-interpret ordinary blunders. Weaker players blunder for skill reasons.

A6. Gestalt: pieces as parts of the self

Purpose / when. Pieces and strategies can stand for parts of the self, including disowned parts [source: Wikipedia]. Use this for exploring inner conflict. No primary Gestalt chess procedure was found [uncertain].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Ask the client to pick a piece that feels like them, and one that feels like a part of themselves they dislike.
2. Invite them to speak as each piece in the first person.
3. Set up a dialogue between the two pieces.
4. Explore what each one needs.
Example language (illustrative): "Be the pawn for a moment. Start with 'I am the pawn, and I…'"
Watch for / working when: affect shifts and the client recognises the piece as part of themselves. Stop if the client becomes confused or dissociated (see §5).

A7. Positions as life metaphors (Rhazes tradition)

Purpose / when. Using chess situations as metaphors that help patients interpret real-life situations and think more clearly [source: Wikipedia; Theravive, both crediting Rhazes, then Fadul and Canlas]. Use it when the client is stuck in a decision or relationship pattern.
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Pause at a meaningful position, for example a pinned piece, a fork, a forced choice between two losses, or a sacrifice for long-term gain.
2. Ask what this position is like in their life.
3. Look at the options on the board, then map them onto the life situation.
Example language (illustrative): "Your bishop is pinned. It can't move without exposing the king. Is anything in your life pinned like that?"
Watch for. Let the client choose the metaphor. Imposed metaphors fall flat.

A8. Meaning and character work (logotherapy-informed)

Purpose / when. Roumen Bezergianov uses chess to help clients find meaning, as described in Character Education with Chess [source: Wikipedia]. That book is not drawn on, so no procedure is given [uncertain].
Steps [synthesis]: ask what each piece "lives for" (its role), and link that to the client's own values and chosen direction.
Example language (illustrative): "Every piece has a job it's good at. What's yours?"
Watch for: tie the work to concrete action plans so it doesn't stay abstract.

A9. CBT use of observed play

Purpose / when. The therapist uses what they see in play to identify sources of negative emotion and dysfunctional behaviour [source: Theravive]. Use it with clients who have perfectionism, frustration intolerance or impulsivity.
Steps [synthesis]:
1. After a blunder or a loss, ask for the automatic thought ("I'm stupid").
2. Rate the emotion.
3. Look for evidence and an alternative thought.
4. Set a behavioural experiment, such as "pause 10 seconds before each move", and review the result over the next game.
Example language (illustrative): "What did you tell yourself the moment you saw you'd lost the rook?"
Watch for / working when: fewer impulsive moves, recovery after mistakes, and similar shifts reported outside the session.

Strand B: group chess-based cognitive training (ECAM/CB-CRT). Each source gives the task categories, but the full ECAM exercise set is not public [uncertain]. B3–B5 are the exercises Seeger et al. (2025) describe. B6 lists the further categories named by Montero et al. (2026).

B1. Opening psychoeducation

Purpose / when. Start of every session. It explains which cognitive function today's tasks train and why it matters. In addiction settings, it also covers how that function links to craving and staying abstinent [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
Steps [synthesis on detail]:
1. Spend 5–10 minutes naming the function, for example working memory.
2. Give a daily-life example.
3. In addiction groups, link the function to a relapse situation.
4. Preview today's tasks.
Example language (illustrative): "Today is about holding information in mind. It's the same skill you use to remember your plan when a craving hits."
Watch for: participants who can repeat the link back in their own words.

B2. Beginner orientation

Purpose / when. First session, for participants who don't know chess. They get a handout explaining the board set-up and the pieces [source: Seeger et al. 2025]. No chess knowledge is required [source: Montero et al. 2026].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Hand out a one-page sheet of the board and pieces in your own design.
2. Name the files, ranks and squares.
3. Practise naming squares on the demo board.
4. Introduce the moves of each piece only when a task needs them.
Example language (illustrative): "You won't need to play a full game here. Just learn the names of the squares."
Watch for: anxiety in beginners. In conventional chess groups, beginners reported more stress, while ECAM participants' stress stayed low regardless of experience [source: Montero et al. 2026].

B3. Short-term memory: position recall

Purpose / when. Trains short-term and working memory. It matches the CIMH description of memorising pieces and positions, then reconstructing them [source: Seeger et al. 2025; CIMH news].
Steps:
1. Show a position on the demo board for one minute [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
2. Remove the pieces.
3. Participants name, or write down, the squares where pieces stood [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
4. A volunteer reconstructs the position on the board.
5. The group applauds.
6. Raise difficulty by adding pieces or shortening the viewing time [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Look for one minute. Then I'll clear the board and you tell me where the pieces were."
Watch for: ask what strategy people used, such as grouping, rehearsing or visualising, then discuss it (B7).

B4. Sustained attention: knight search

Purpose / when. Trains sustained and selective attention [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
Steps:
1. On a printed sheet with many pieces, participants mark every white knight standing on a white square, then count them [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
2. Compare counts across the group.
3. Discuss errors and what helped focus [synthesis].
4. Make later rounds harder with more distractors or a time limit [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Mark only white knights on white squares. Ignore everything else."
Watch for: speed versus accuracy trade-offs, which feed into the impulse-control discussion.

B5. Executive function: legal-move vote

Purpose / when. Trains inhibition, rule-checking and decision-making [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
Steps:
1. The leader reads out a move in notation, for example a bishop capture with check (the form of example Seeger et al. give).
2. Participants judge whether the move is legal in the position shown, and vote yes or no [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
3. A volunteer explains the answer at the demo board.
4. The group applauds.
Example language (illustrative): "Hands up if this move is legal. Take a moment before you vote."
Watch for: people who vote instantly. Praise the pause.

B6. Other ECAM task categories

Purpose / when. ECAM also trains selective attention, pattern recognition, visuospatial skills, planning and inhibition [source: Montero et al. 2026]. The source names these categories but gives no specific tasks for them [uncertain].
Steps [synthesis: example designs, not ECAM tasks]:
- Pattern recognition: find all the pieces under attack.
- Visuospatial: trace a knight's route from one square to another in the fewest moves.
- Planning: find a sequence of moves that reaches a goal square, and say it aloud before moving.
- Inhibition: name the obvious capture, then find a better move instead.
Example language (illustrative): "Before you touch anything, tell us your whole plan."
Watch for: pitch difficulty so that most people succeed with effort.

B7. Metacognitive discussion and thinking aloud

Purpose / when. After each task, to make thinking processes conscious. It uses thinking aloud and discussion of the cognitive processes involved [source: Seeger et al. 2025]. It also covers reflection on cognitive processes and emotional self-regulation [source: Montero et al. 2026].
Steps [synthesis on detail]:
1. Ask "How did you do that?"
2. Name the strategy.
3. Ask where else it would help.
4. Explore the feelings that came up during the task (frustration, pride) and how participants handled them.
Example language (illustrative): "What did you do in your head when you didn't know the answer straight away?"
Watch for: spontaneous use of named strategies in later sessions.

B8. Demo-board presentation with group applause

Purpose / when. Builds motivation and cohesion. Each participant presents a solution at the demo board in front of peers, and everyone claps, whether or not the solution is correct [source: Seeger et al. 2025; Montero et al. 2026].
Steps:
1. Invite volunteers, and later give everyone a turn [synthesis].
2. The person shows their solution and explains it.
3. The whole group applauds.
4. The leader corrects errors warmly, as a lesson for the group.
Example language (illustrative): "Come and show us how you'd do it. Whatever happens, we clap."
Watch for: socially anxious members. Let them present in pairs at first [synthesis].

B9. Transfer to life (bridging)

Purpose / when. End of each session. It links the patterns learned on the board to real situations. The authors name this as an aim and say it needs more empirical support [source: Montero et al. 2026].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Ask each person for one situation in the coming days where they will use today's skill, such as pausing before acting, or planning several steps ahead.
2. Review it next session.
Example language (illustrative): "Where this week could you 'check if the move is legal' before you act?"
Watch for: concrete examples. Vague answers need prompting.

Strand C: chess inside other therapies

C1. ACT chessboard metaphor (self-as-context)

Purpose / when. A central ACT intervention for building awareness of the observing self [source: Contextual Science summary of Hayes, Strosahl & Wilson 1999]. Use it with clients who fight their thoughts and feelings, or who identify with them.
Steps (paraphrased from the sources):
1. Ask the client to picture a board, with their positive thoughts and feelings on one side and their negative ones on the other.
2. Describe the lifelong effort to push the good pieces forward and get rid of the bad.
3. Point out the two problems: there are endless pieces, so removing negatives only brings more; and positive pieces call up negative ones.
4. Conclude that the battle wastes energy and can't be won.
5. Offer the alternative position: the client is the board, in full contact with every piece but not taking part in the fight. [source: Providence handout]
6. Optionally act it out with a real board. Use it to show how little effort it takes to hold the pieces, which illustrates willingness [source: Contextual Science].
Example language. The sources stress that thoughts, feelings, sensations and memories are "pieces on the board, they are not you" (p.192) [source: Contextual Science]. Illustrative: "Notice which level you're on right now: a piece in the fight, or the board?"
Watch for. Some clients want to sweep the pieces off and wipe the slate clean [source: Contextual Science]. Gently point out that this is the same struggle again [synthesis]. Therapists should also notice their own attachment to their self-concept [source: Contextual Science].

C2. Chess as a distraction skill (DBT distress tolerance)

Purpose / when. Chess puzzles or games can serve as cognitive distraction, a distress-tolerance skill for intense emotional distress [source: Gerlach 2024].
Steps [synthesis]:
1. In skills coaching, add "a chess puzzle on my phone" to the client's distraction list.
2. Practise it when the client is mildly distressed first.
3. Rate distress before and after.
4. Agree a time limit so the puzzle doesn't become avoidance.
Example language (illustrative): "When your distress is at 8, try three puzzles, then re-rate."
Watch for. Make sure it is a short-term bridge, not a way to avoid problem-solving. In clients prone to gaming, watch for compulsive online play.

5. Handling problems

The sources say almost nothing about handling problems. Everything below is [synthesis] unless it carries a citation.

Stuck: the game replaces therapy. The client plays every session and avoids talking.
- Set a structure: 20 minutes of play, then 20 minutes of talk.
- Name the pattern without blame: "Chess feels safer than talking about home. That makes sense. Let's give home ten minutes today."
- Remember that chess is meant to be used alongside evidence-based treatment, not alone [source: Gerlach 2024].
Stuck: the client wants only to win, or to beat the therapist.
- Treat this as material: what does winning mean to them?
- If the competition blocks the work, switch to non-competitive tasks (Strand B-style puzzles, or solving a problem together).
Therapist's own competitiveness, or skill mismatch.
- If you are much stronger, handicap yourself openly, for example by playing without a piece, rather than secretly throwing games. Secretly lost games can feel patronising if the client discovers them.
- If you are much weaker, let the client teach you. This can build their mastery.
- Watch your own reactions to losing. They are countertransference data.
Frustration, loss intolerance, overwhelm. Tears, rage or a meltdown after losing a piece or a game.
- Pause the game and use grounding.
- Validate the feeling.
- Come back to the board only by agreement.
- For children, practise "good losing" with short games and planned losses.
- Agree a stop signal in advance.
- In groups, applause regardless of correctness reduces fear of failure [source: Seeger et al. 2025; Montero et al. 2026].
Aggression or throwing pieces.
- Use soft or large pieces with at-risk clients.
- State the limit: "Pieces stay on the board."
- End the game if needed, follow your service's risk procedure, and later explore the trigger.
Disclosure or risk in session. Suicidal thoughts, self-harm, or abuse disclosed during play.
- Stop the game.
- Do a standard risk assessment and follow your safety-planning procedure.
- With minors, follow safeguarding and mandatory-reporting duties.
- Record the client's words, not your interpretation of the game.
Over-interpretation. The therapist reads diagnoses or trauma into moves.
- Hold all play-based hypotheses tentatively, and check them with the client.
- Never use game behaviour as evidence of a disorder or of abuse. No validated chess-based assessment was found.
Non-adherence and dropout (groups).
- The AUD trial lost 39% of participants to relapse or dropout, and it used at least 50% attendance as its completion criterion [source: Seeger et al. 2025].
- Expect dropout, plan catch-up handouts, and phone participants who miss two sessions.
Mixed ability in groups. Experienced players get bored; beginners get anxious.
- Use tiered versions of each task.
- Pair experts with beginners as helpers.
- Remember that non-competitive structure protected beginners from stress in the ECAM data [source: Montero et al. 2026].
Ruptures. The client feels judged by an interpretation, or humiliated by losing.
- Acknowledge it directly: "I think my comment about your queen sacrifice landed badly."
- Invite their view, and adjust: less interpretation, more choice about whether to play.
ACT metaphor misfires. The client sweeps the pieces off [source: Contextual Science notes this happens].
- Explore the wish for a clean slate as part of the struggle.
- Return to noticing from the board's position.
Cognitive impairment, dementia, ADHD, autism.
- Shorten tasks, use large-print boards, keep breaks frequent, and keep the structure predictable.
- Do not promise cognitive or symptom benefits beyond what the studies report. The ADHD and autism evidence is small and mixed [source: Gerlach 2024].
Problem gaming.
- Do not recommend unlimited online chess as homework for clients with compulsive gaming or gambling patterns.
- Prefer over-the-board play, with time limits.

Sources

Sources: