Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1510.02300

Preference reversal in quantum decision theory

Vyacheslav I. Yukalov, Didier Sornette

Published Oct 8, 2015• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We consider the psychological effect of preference reversal and show that it finds a natural explanation in the frame of quantum decision theory. When people choose between lotteries with non-negative payoffs, they prefer a more certain lottery because of uncertainty aversion. But when people evaluate lottery prices, e.g. for selling to others the right to play them, they do this more rationally, being less subject to behavioral biases. This difference can be explained by the presence of the attraction factors entering the expression of quantum probabilities. Only the existence of attraction factors can explain why, considering two lotteries with close utility factors, a decision maker prefers one of them when choosing, but evaluates higher the other one when pricing. We derive a general quantitative criterion for the preference reversal to occur that relates the utilities of the two lotteries to the attraction factors under choosing versus pricing and test successfully its application on experiments by Tversky et al. We also show that the planning paradox can be treated as a kind of preference reversal.

DOI
10.3929/ethz-b-000106233

Related papers

Preference reversal in quantum decision theory

Vyacheslav I. Yukalov, Didier Sornette

We consider the psychological effect of preference reversal and show that it finds a natural explanation in the frame of quantum decision theory. When people choose between lotteries with non-negative payoffs, they prefer a more certain lottery because of uncertainty aversion. But when people evaluate lottery prices, e.g., for selling to others the right to play them, they do this more rationally, being less subject to behavioral biases. This difference can be explained by the presence of the attraction factors entering the expression of quantum probabilities. Only the existence of attraction factors can explain why, considering two lotteries with close utility factors, a decision maker prefers one of them when choosing, but evaluates higher the other one when pricing. We derive a general quantitative criterion for the preference reversal to occur that relates the utilities of the two lotteries to the attraction factors under choosing vs. pricing and test successfully its application on experiments by Tversky et al. We also show that the planning paradox can be treated as a kind of preference reversal.

Frontiers in Psychology•Oct 8, 2015•22 citations

Manipulating Decision Making of Typical Agents

Vyacheslav I. Yukalov, Didier Sornette

We investigate how the choice of decision makers can be varied under the presence of risk and uncertainty. Our analysis is based on the approach we have previously applied to individual decision makers, which we now generalize to the case of decision makers that are members of a society. The approach employs the mathematical techniques that are common in quantum theory, justifying our naming as quantum decision theory. However, we do not assume that decision makers are quantum objects. The techniques of quantum theory are needed only for defining the prospect probabilities taking into account such hidden variables as behavioral biases and other subconscious feelings. The approach describes an agent's choice as a probabilistic event occurring with a probability that is the sum of a utility factor and of an attraction factor. The attraction factor embodies subjective and unconscious dimensions in the mind of the decision maker. We show that the typical aggregate amplitude of the attraction factor is 1/4, and it can be either positive or negative depending on the relative attraction of the competing choices. The most efficient way of varying the decision makers choice is realized by influencing the attraction factor. This can be done in two ways. One method is to arrange in a special manner the payoff weights, which induces the required changes of the values of attraction factors. We show that a slight variation of the payoff weights can invert the sign of the attraction factors and reverse the decision preferences, even when the prospect utilities remain unchanged. The second method of influencing the decision makers choice is by providing information to decision makers. The methods of influencing decision making are illustrated by several experiments, whose outcomes are compared quantitatively with the predictions of our approach.

IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems•Apr 17, 2014•45 citations

Manipulating decision making of typical agents

Vyacheslav I. Yukalov, Didier Sornette

We investigate how the choice of decision makers can be varied under the presence of risk and uncertainty. Our analysis is based on the approach we have previously applied to individual decision makers, which we now generalize to the case of decision makers that are members of a society. The approach employs the mathematical techniques that are common in quantum theory, justifying our naming as Quantum Decision Theory. However, we do not assume that decision makers are quantum objects. The techniques of quantum theory are needed only for defining the prospect probabilities taking into account such hidden variables as behavioral biases and other subconscious feelings. The approach describes an agent's choice as a probabilistic event occurring with a probability that is the sum of a utility factor and of an attraction factor. The attraction factor embodies subjective and unconscious dimensions in the mind of the decision maker. We show that the typical aggregate amplitude of the attraction factor is $1/4$, and it can be either positive or negative depending on the relative attraction of the competing choices. The most efficient way of varying the decision makers choice is realized by influencing the attraction factor. This can be done in two ways. One method is to arrange in a special manner the payoff weights, which induces the required changes of the values of attraction factors. We show that a slight variation of the payoff weights can invert the sign of the attraction factors and reverse the decision preferences, even when the prospect utilities remain unchanged. The second method of influencing the decision makers choice is by providing information to decision makers. The methods of influencing decision making are illustrated by several experiments, whose outcomes are compared quantitatively with the predictions of our approach.

arXiv:1409.0636•Sep 2, 2014•1 citation

Calibration of quantum decision theory: aversion to large losses and predictability of probabilistic choices

Tatyana Kovalenko, S Vincent, Vyacheslav I. Yukalov +1 more

Abstract We present the first calibration of quantum decision theory (QDT) to a dataset of binary risky choice. We quantitatively account for the fraction of choice reversals between two repetitions of the experiment, using a probabilistic choice formulation in the simplest form without model assumption or adjustable parameters. The prediction of choice reversal is then refined by introducing heterogeneity between decision makers through their differentiation into two groups: ‘majoritarian’ and ‘contrarian’ (in proportion 3:1). This supports the first fundamental tenet of QDT, which models choice as an inherent probabilistic process, where the probability of a prospect can be expressed as the sum of its utility and attraction factors. We propose to parameterize the utility factor with a stochastic version of cumulative prospect theory (logit-CPT), and the attraction factor with a constant absolute risk aversion function. For this dataset, and penalising the larger number of QDT parameters via the Wilks test of nested hypotheses, the QDT model is found to perform significantly better than logit-CPT at both the aggregate and individual levels, and for all considered fit criteria for the first experiment iteration and for predictions (second ‘out-of-sample’ iteration). The distinctive QDT effect captured by the attraction factor is mostly appreciable (i.e. most relevant and strongest in amplitude) for prospects with big losses. Our quantitative analysis of the experimental results supports the existence of an intrinsic limit of predictability, which is associated with the inherent probabilistic nature of choice. The results of the paper can find applications both in the prediction of choice of human decision makers as well as for organizing the operation of artificial intelligence.

Journal of Physics Complexity•Feb 20, 2023•8 citations

Calibration of Quantum Decision Theory: Aversion to Large Losses and Predictability of Probabilistic Choices

Tatyana Kovalenko, Vincent, S., Vyacheslav I. Yukalov +1 more

We present the first calibration of quantum decision theory (QDT) to a dataset of binary risky choice. We quantitatively account for the fraction of choice reversals between two repetitions of the experiment, using a probabilistic choice formulation in the simplest form without model assumption or adjustable parameters. The prediction of choice reversal is then refined by introducing heterogeneity between decision makers through their differentiation into two groups: ``majoritarian'' and ``contrarian'' (in proportion 3:1). This supports the first fundamental tenet of QDT, which models choice as an inherent probabilistic process, where the probability of a prospect can be expressed as the sum of its utility and attraction factors. We propose to parameterise the utility factor with a stochastic version of cumulative prospect theory (logit-CPT), and the attraction factor with a constant absolute risk aversion (CARA) function. For this dataset, and penalising the larger number of QDT parameters via the Wilks test of nested hypotheses, the QDT model is found to perform significantly better than logit-CPT at both the aggregate and individual levels, and for all considered fit criteria for the first experiment iteration and for predictions (second ``out-of-sample'' iteration). The distinctive QDT effect captured by the attraction factor is mostly appreciable (i.e., most relevant and strongest in amplitude) for prospects with big losses. Our quantitative analysis of the experimental results supports the existence of an intrinsic limit of predictability, which is associated with the inherent probabilistic nature of choice. The results of the paper can find applications both in the prediction of choice of human decision makers as well as for organizing the operation of artificial intelligence.

arXiv:2303.02028•Mar 3, 2023•1 citation

Quantitative Predictions in Quantum Decision Theory

Vyacheslav I. Yukalov, Didier Sornette

Quantum decision theory, advanced earlier by the authors, and illustrated for lotteries with gains, is generalized to the games containing lotteries with gains as well as losses. The mathematical structure of the approach is based on the theory of quantum measurements, which makes this approach relevant both for the description of decision making of humans and the creation of artificial quantum intelligence. General rules are formulated allowing for the explicit calculation of quantum probabilities representing the fraction of decision makers preferring the considered prospects. This provides a method to quantitatively predict decision-maker choices, including the cases of games with high uncertainty for which the classical expected utility theory fails. The approach is applied to experimental results obtained on a set of lottery gambles with gains and losses. Our predictions, involving no fitting parameters, are in very good agreement with experimental data. The use of quantum decision making in game theory is described. A principal scheme of creating quantum artificial intelligence is suggested.

arXiv:1802.06348•IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems•Aug 15, 2016•59 citations
We consider the psychological effect of preference reversal and show that it finds a natural explanation in the frame of quantum decision theory. When people choose between lotteries with non-negative payoffs, they prefer a more certain lottery because of uncertainty aversion. But when people evaluate lottery prices, e.g. for selling to others the right to play them, they do this more rationally, being less subject to behavioral biases. This difference can be explained by the presence of the attraction factors entering the expression of quantum probabilities. Only the existence of attraction factors can explain why, considering two lotteries with close utility factors, a decision maker prefers one of them when choosing, but evaluates higher the other one when pricing. We derive a general quantitative criterion for the preference reversal to occur that relates the utilities of the two lotteries to the attraction factors under choosing versus pricing and test successfully its application on experiments by Tversky et al. We also show that the planning paradox can be treated as a kind of preference reversal.
We consider the psychological effect of preference reversal and show that it finds a natural explanation in the frame of quantum decision theory. When people choose between lotteries with non-negative payoffs, they prefer a more certain lottery because of uncertainty aversion. But when people evaluate lottery prices, e.g., for selling to others the right to play them, they do this more rationally, being less subject to behavioral biases. This difference can be explained by the presence of the attraction factors entering the expression of quantum probabilities. Only the existence of attraction factors can explain why, considering two lotteries with close utility factors, a decision maker prefers one of them when choosing, but evaluates higher the other one when pricing. We derive a general quantitative criterion for the preference reversal to occur that relates the utilities of the two lotteries to the attraction factors under choosing vs. pricing and test successfully its application on experiments by Tversky et al. We also show that the planning paradox can be treated as a kind of preference reversal.
We investigate how the choice of decision makers can be varied under the presence of risk and uncertainty. Our analysis is based on the approach we have previously applied to individual decision makers, which we now generalize to the case of decision makers that are members of a society. The approach employs the mathematical techniques that are common in quantum theory, justifying our naming as quantum decision theory. However, we do not assume that decision makers are quantum objects. The techniques of quantum theory are needed only for defining the prospect probabilities taking into account such hidden variables as behavioral biases and other subconscious feelings. The approach describes an agent's choice as a probabilistic event occurring with a probability that is the sum of a utility factor and of an attraction factor. The attraction factor embodies subjective and unconscious dimensions in the mind of the decision maker. We show that the typical aggregate amplitude of the attraction factor is 1/4, and it can be either positive or negative depending on the relative attraction of the competing choices. The most efficient way of varying the decision makers choice is realized by influencing the attraction factor. This can be done in two ways. One method is to arrange in a special manner the payoff weights, which induces the required changes of the values of attraction factors. We show that a slight variation of the payoff weights can invert the sign of the attraction factors and reverse the decision preferences, even when the prospect utilities remain unchanged. The second method of influencing the decision makers choice is by providing information to decision makers. The methods of influencing decision making are illustrated by several experiments, whose outcomes are compared quantitatively with the predictions of our approach.
We investigate how the choice of decision makers can be varied under the presence of risk and uncertainty. Our analysis is based on the approach we have previously applied to individual decision makers, which we now generalize to the case of decision makers that are members of a society. The approach employs the mathematical techniques that are common in quantum theory, justifying our naming as Quantum Decision Theory. However, we do not assume that decision makers are quantum objects. The techniques of quantum theory are needed only for defining the prospect probabilities taking into account such hidden variables as behavioral biases and other subconscious feelings. The approach describes an agent's choice as a probabilistic event occurring with a probability that is the sum of a utility factor and of an attraction factor. The attraction factor embodies subjective and unconscious dimensions in the mind of the decision maker. We show that the typical aggregate amplitude of the attraction factor is 1/41/41/4, and it can be either positive or negative depending on the relative attraction of the competing choices. The most efficient way of varying the decision makers choice is realized by influencing the attraction factor. This can be done in two ways. One method is to arrange in a special manner the payoff weights, which induces the required changes of the values of attraction factors. We show that a slight variation of the payoff weights can invert the sign of the attraction factors and reverse the decision preferences, even when the prospect utilities remain unchanged. The second method of influencing the decision makers choice is by providing information to decision makers. The methods of influencing decision making are illustrated by several experiments, whose outcomes are compared quantitatively with the predictions of our approach.
Abstract We present the first calibration of quantum decision theory (QDT) to a dataset of binary risky choice. We quantitatively account for the fraction of choice reversals between two repetitions of the experiment, using a probabilistic choice formulation in the simplest form without model assumption or adjustable parameters. The prediction of choice reversal is then refined by introducing heterogeneity between decision makers through their differentiation into two groups: ‘majoritarian’ and ‘contrarian’ (in proportion 3:1). This supports the first fundamental tenet of QDT, which models choice as an inherent probabilistic process, where the probability of a prospect can be expressed as the sum of its utility and attraction factors. We propose to parameterize the utility factor with a stochastic version of cumulative prospect theory (logit-CPT), and the attraction factor with a constant absolute risk aversion function. For this dataset, and penalising the larger number of QDT parameters via the Wilks test of nested hypotheses, the QDT model is found to perform significantly better than logit-CPT at both the aggregate and individual levels, and for all considered fit criteria for the first experiment iteration and for predictions (second ‘out-of-sample’ iteration). The distinctive QDT effect captured by the attraction factor is mostly appreciable (i.e. most relevant and strongest in amplitude) for prospects with big losses. Our quantitative analysis of the experimental results supports the existence of an intrinsic limit of predictability, which is associated with the inherent probabilistic nature of choice. The results of the paper can find applications both in the prediction of choice of human decision makers as well as for organizing the operation of artificial intelligence.
We present the first calibration of quantum decision theory (QDT) to a dataset of binary risky choice. We quantitatively account for the fraction of choice reversals between two repetitions of the experiment, using a probabilistic choice formulation in the simplest form without model assumption or adjustable parameters. The prediction of choice reversal is then refined by introducing heterogeneity between decision makers through their differentiation into two groups: ``majoritarian'' and ``contrarian'' (in proportion 3:1). This supports the first fundamental tenet of QDT, which models choice as an inherent probabilistic process, where the probability of a prospect can be expressed as the sum of its utility and attraction factors. We propose to parameterise the utility factor with a stochastic version of cumulative prospect theory (logit-CPT), and the attraction factor with a constant absolute risk aversion (CARA) function. For this dataset, and penalising the larger number of QDT parameters via the Wilks test of nested hypotheses, the QDT model is found to perform significantly better than logit-CPT at both the aggregate and individual levels, and for all considered fit criteria for the first experiment iteration and for predictions (second ``out-of-sample'' iteration). The distinctive QDT effect captured by the attraction factor is mostly appreciable (i.e., most relevant and strongest in amplitude) for prospects with big losses. Our quantitative analysis of the experimental results supports the existence of an intrinsic limit of predictability, which is associated with the inherent probabilistic nature of choice. The results of the paper can find applications both in the prediction of choice of human decision makers as well as for organizing the operation of artificial intelligence.
Quantum decision theory, advanced earlier by the authors, and illustrated for lotteries with gains, is generalized to the games containing lotteries with gains as well as losses. The mathematical structure of the approach is based on the theory of quantum measurements, which makes this approach relevant both for the description of decision making of humans and the creation of artificial quantum intelligence. General rules are formulated allowing for the explicit calculation of quantum probabilities representing the fraction of decision makers preferring the considered prospects. This provides a method to quantitatively predict decision-maker choices, including the cases of games with high uncertainty for which the classical expected utility theory fails. The approach is applied to experimental results obtained on a set of lottery gambles with gains and losses. Our predictions, involving no fitting parameters, are in very good agreement with experimental data. The use of quantum decision making in game theory is described. A principal scheme of creating quantum artificial intelligence is suggested.