In the present article we introduce a quantum mechanism which is able to describe the creation of correlations in the evaluation of random independent events: such correlations, known as positive and negative recency, correspond respectively to the hot hand's and to the gambler's fallacies. Thus we propose a description of these effects in terms of qubits, which may become entangled, forming a system which can not be described completely only in terms of its constituents. We show that such formalism is able to describe and interpret the experimental results, thus providing a general and unifying framework for the cognitive heuristics.
In the present article we introduce a quantum mechanism which is able to describe the creation of correlations in the evaluation of random independent events: such correlations, known as positive and negative recency, correspond respectively to the hot hand's and to the gambler's fallacies. Thus we propose a description of these effects in terms of qubits, which may become entangled, forming a system which can not be described completely only in terms of its constituents. We show that such formalism is able to describe and interpret the experimental results, thus providing a general and unifying framework for the cognitive heuristics.
In the present article we consider the inverse fallacy, a well known cognitive heuristic experimentally tested in cognitive science, which occurs for intuitive judgments in situations of bounded rationality. We show that the quantum formalism can be used to describe in a very simple and general way this fallacy within the quantum formalism. Thus we suggest that in cognitive science the formalism of quantum mechanics can be used to describe a quantum regime, the bounded-rationality regime, where the cognitive heuristics are valid.
In the present article we consider the conjunction fallacy, a well known cognitive heuristic experimentally tested in cognitive science, which occurs for intuitive judgments in situations of bounded rationality. We show that the quantum formalism can be used to describe in a very simple way this fallacy in terms of interference effect. We evidence that the quantum formalism leads quite naturally to violations of Bayes' rule when considering the probability of the conjunction of two events. Thus we suggest that in cognitive science the formalism of quantum mechanics can be used to describe a \textit{quantum regime}, the bounded-rationality regime, where the cognitive heuristics are valid.
Uncertainty is an intrinsic part of life; most events, affairs, and questions are uncertain. A key problem in behavioral sciences is how the mind copes with uncertain information. Quantum probability theory offers a set of principles for inference, which align well with intuition about psychological processes in certain cases: cases when it appears that inference is contextual, the mental state changes as a result of previous judgments, or there is interference between different possibilities. We motivate the use of quantum theory in cognition and its key characteristics. For each of these characteristics, we review relevant quantum cognitive models and empirical support. The scope of quantum cognitive models encompasses fallacies in decision-making (such as the conjunction fallacy or the disjunction effect), question order effects, conceptual combination, evidence accumulation, perception, over-/underdistribution effects in memory, and more. Quantum models often formalize psychological ideas previously expressed in heuristic terms, allow unified explanations of previously disparate findings, and have led to several surprising, novel predictions. We also cast a critical eye on quantum models and consider some of their shortcomings and issues regarding their further development.
Trust models play an important role in computational environments. One of the main aims of the work undertaken in this domain is to provide a model that can better describe the socio-technical nature of computational trust. It has been recently shown that quantum-like formulations in the field of human decision making can better explain the underlying nature of these types of processes. Based on this research, the aim of this paper is to propose a novel model of trust based on quantum probabilities as the underlying mathematics of quantum theory. It will be shown that by using this new mathematical framework, we will have a powerful mechanism to model the contextuality property of trust. Also, it is hypothesized that many events or evaluations in the context of trust can be and should be considered as incompatible, which is unique to the noncommutative structure of quantum probabilities. The main contribution of this paper will be that, by using the quantum Bayesian inference mechanism for belief updating in the framework of quantum theory, we propose a biased trust inference mechanism. This mechanism allows us to model the negative and positive biases that a trustor may subjectively feel toward a certain trustee candidate. It is shown that by using this bias, we can model and describe the exploration versus exploitation problem in the context of trust decision making, recency effects for recently good or bad transactions, filtering pessimistic and optimistic recommendations that may result in good-mouthing or bad-mouthing attacks, the attitude of the trustor toward risk and uncertainty in different situations and the pseudo-transitivity property of trust. Finally, we have conducted several experimental evaluations in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model in different scenarios.
One of the most complex systems is the human brain whose formalized functioning is characterized by decision theory. We present a "Quantum Decision Theory" of decision-making, based on the mathematical theory of separable Hilbert spaces. This mathematical structure captures the effect of superposition of composite prospects, including many incorporated intentions, which allows us to explain a variety of interesting fallacies and anomalies that have been reported to particularize the decision-making of real human beings. The theory describes entangled decision-making, non-commutativity of subsequent decisions, and intention interference of composite prospects. We demonstrate how the violation of the Savage's sure-thing principle (disjunction effect) can be explained as a result of the interference of intentions, when making decisions under uncertainty. The conjunction fallacy is also explained by the presence of the interference terms. We demonstrate that all known anomalies and paradoxes, documented in the context of classical decision theory, are reducible to just a few mathematical archetypes, all of which allow the finding of straightforward explanations in the frame of the developed quantum approach.
In this article we describe a cognitive heuristic known as the unpacking effect by using a mathematical model, based on the quantum formalism, already introduced for the conjunction fallacy. We present the basic postulates of such quantum-like model and we show that the presence of interference terms is responsible of the unpacking effect. In particular, the sign of the interference and its functional form are able to describe the experimental results about subadditivity, superadditivity and additivity. A comparison with previous models is presented, as well as new experimental predictions, allowing to conclude that this new formalism and the basic concepts of quantum information processing provide a new promising way to describe and understand human judgement and categorization.