Quantum-like decision theory is by now a theoretically well-developed field (see e.g., Danilov et al. 2018A). We here test the predictions of an application of this approach to persuasion. One remarkable result entails that in contrast to Bayesian persuasion, distraction rather than relevant information has a powerful potential to influence decision-making. We first provide a quantum decision model for a choice between two uncertain alternatives. We derive the impact of persuasion by means of distractive questions and contrast them with the predictions of the Bayesian model. Next, we conduct an experiment where respondents choose between supporting either one of two projects to save endangered species. We test the impact of persuasion in the form of questions related to different aspects of the uncertain value of the two projects. The experiment involves 900 respondents divided into three groups: a control group, a first treatment group and the distraction treatment group. Our main result is that, in accordance with the predictions of quantum persuasion but in violation with the Bayesian model, distraction significantly affects decision-making. Population variables play no role. Some significant variations between subgroups are exhibited and discussed. The results of the experiment provide support for the hypothesis that the manipulability of people's decision-making can be explained by the quantum indeterminacy of their subjective representations of reality.
Quantum-like decision theory is by now a theoretically well-developed field (see e.g., Danilov et al. 2018A). We here test the predictions of an application of this approach to persuasion. One remarkable result entails that in contrast to Bayesian persuasion, distraction rather than relevant information has a powerful potential to influence decision-making. We first provide a quantum decision model for a choice between two uncertain alternatives. We derive the impact of persuasion by means of distractive questions and contrast them with the predictions of the Bayesian model. Next, we conduct an experiment where respondents choose between supporting either one of two projects to save endangered species. We test the impact of persuasion in the form of questions related to different aspects of the uncertain value of the two projects. The experiment involves 900 respondents divided into three groups: a control group, a first treatment group and the distraction treatment group. Our main result is that, in accordance with the predictions of quantum persuasion but in violation with the Bayesian model, distraction significantly affects decision-making. Population variables play no role. Some significant variations between subgroups are exhibited and discussed. The results of the experiment provide support for the hypothesis that the manipulability of people's decision-making can be explained by the quantum indeterminacy of their subjective representations of reality.
Quantum-like decision theory is by now a theoretically well-developed field (see e.g., Danilov, Lambert-Mogiliansky & Vergopoulos, 2018). We provide a first test of the predictions of an application of this approach to persuasion. One remarkable result entails that, in contrast to Bayesian persuasion, distraction rather than relevant information has a powerful potential to influence decision-making. We first develop a quantum decision model of choice between two uncertain alternatives. We derive the impact of persuasion by means of distractive questions and contrast them with the predictions of the Bayesian model. Next, we provide the results from a first test of the theory. We conducted an experiment where respondents choose between supporting either one of two projects to save endangered species. We tested the impact of persuasion in the form of questions related to different aspects of the uncertain value of the two projects. The experiment involved 1253 respondents divided into three groups: a control group, a first treatment group and the distraction treatment group. Our main result is that, in accordance with the predictions of quantum persuasion but in violation with the Bayesian model, distraction significantly affects decision-making. Population variables play no role. Some significant variations between subgroups are exhibited and discussed. The results of the experiment provide support for the hypothesis that the manipulability of people’s decision-making can to some extent be explained by the quantum indeterminacy of their subjective representation of reality.
In this paper we investigate the potential for persuasion arising from the quantum indeterminacy of a decision-maker's beliefs, a feature that has been proposed as a formal expression of well-known cognitive limitations. We focus on a situation where an agent called Sender only has few opportunities to influence the decision-maker called Receiver. We do not address the full persuasion problem but restrict attention to a simpler one that we call targeting, i.e. inducing a specific belief state. The analysis is developed within the frame of a n-dimensional Hilbert space model. We find that when the prior is known, Sender can induce a targeted belief with a probability of at least 1/n when using two sequential measurements. This figure climbs to 1/2 when both the target and the belief are known pure states. A main insight from the analysis is that a well-designed strategy of distraction can be used as a first step to confuse Receiver. We thus find that distraction rather than the provision of relevant arguments is an effective means to achieve persuasion. We provide an example from political decision-making.
The core assumptions of modern economic utility theories such as rationality have been placed under scrutiny by recent studies in decision theory and behavioural economics and fi?nance. The main questions that were explored in these studies could be expressed as follows: do people always make rational choices? Do they make use of the normative rules of traditional logic and probability when dealing with risk and uncertainty? Are there any alternative methods to capture choices and reasoning when individuals are faced with uncertainty and risk? In this thesis I will elaborate on an interdisciplinary application of so-called QL (quantum-like) models to decision-making problems in ?finance and other socio-economic contexts. The core inquiry of this work is related to experimental tests of decision making with the help of investment related questions. Calculus and logic borrowed from quantum physics will be used to develop probabilistic models for the formation and evolution of decisions in ?finance context with the potential to generalize to other social decision- making settings. The main fi?ndings of this thesis can be summarized as follows: individuals exhibit preference reversals and context-dependent behaviour in different informational contexts. In particular, in condition of risk individuals exhibit uncertainty aversion and thus aversion to participating in other investment task, violating the postulates of classical probability theory. The core principle of rational (consequential) behaviour conceived by Savage (1954) [207], that is the "Savage Sure Thing" principle, was shown to be violated. In mathematical language, this violation is equivalent to the violation of the "Law of total probability". Implying contextuality of human judgement, different events cannot be jointly evaluated in a single probability space. Moreover, additional experimental fi?ndings showed that participants exhibited reference dependence in their risk attitudes depending on the preceding gain respective loss. These fi?ndings were statistically signi?cant and a quantum model for accommodating the above effects of contextual behaviour is introduced. A geometric depiction of the experimental fi?ndings was proposed. A so-called `state reconstruction' procedure from statistical data was performed via the inverse Born's rule (1926) [47], allowing the construction of a complete representation of agents' resolution from indeterminacy.
Other people's beliefs may influence our own beliefs. Such effects, sometimes referred to as 'crowd-wisdom', can be revealed from group-informed responses in controlled experiments. Our study presents a formal choice model to understand how multiple respondents iteratively interact when communicating their responses, which we test on data from Granovskiy et al. (2015)'s social information experiment. In this multi-stage decision process, information from the group's response distribution influences individual judgments before respondents adjust their next response. Our model describes each respondent's probabilistic belief state, and uses a quantum-like morphing evolution based on the Brassard-Høyer-Grover amplification formalism. This framework enables: (i) the description of multi-respondent cognitive interactions through assimilation to or polarization away from other beliefs, (ii) the implementation via Hamiltonian operators using projection operators of source ('initial') and target ('informing') belief states, and (iii) the resolution of periodicity issues in previous Schrödinger-like models through through bounded temporal parametrization. A performance comparison is done for the quantum-like models using morphing and standard hopping, and a classical Markov hopping model. The quantum-like morphing model with multi-component target belief demonstrated superior BIC performance across the parameter space of evolution time (tfrac), belief uncertainty (SD), and sampling temperature (T). This belief morphing approach hence provides an effective and innovative method to model social influence in group decision-making.
Of the three faculties of subjectivity, the empirical case for quantum cognition is the strongest. In the past decade a rapidly growing body of scholarship has emerged at the intersection of mathematical psychology and physics that not only models cognition in explicitly quantum terms, but has rigorously tested these models as well. While it remains to be seen how mainstream psychologists will respond, “quantum decision theory” has clearly come of age. Moreover, at the same time an almost completely independent literature has emerged on quantum game theory as well. This work is more in a purely formal vein and thus less well tested against real data, although its predictions about how people should behave in quantum games appear to conform to what experimental game theorists have found. I briefly take up quantum game theory at the end of this chapter, but my main focus will be on its decision-theoretic cousin. Quantum consciousness theory suggests that human beings are literally walking wave functions. Most quantum decision theorists would not go that far, and indeed – perhaps wary of controversy – they generally barely mention quantum consciousness, and then only to emphasize that they are making no claims about what is going on deep inside the brain (much less about consciousness), but are only interested in behavior. Instead, they have motivated their work in two other ways. First, they have highlighted the intuitive fit between quantum theory's indeterminism and the probabilistic character of human behavior. If we were founding the social sciences today and started – without metaphysical prejudice – by looking for useful models in physics, then quantum models would be a much more obvious import than classical ones. Second, quantum decision theorists have argued that their model can explain long-standing anomalies in human behavior under uncertainty. Beyond that they have remained agnostic about quantum consciousness, which makes quantum decision theory a form of what is called “weak” or “generalized” quantum theory, in which the formalism is detached from its physical basis and used simply as a tool to describe phenomena.
Since the 70’s, researchers noticed that people do not follow the rules of probability theory while making decisions under risk.Just like quantum physics was created in order to accommodate paradoxical findings from classical physics, quantum cognition arose as a disciple with the promise of creating models that would accommodate and explain the violations found in human decision-making.In this work, we explore an alternative quantum structure to perform quantum probabilistic inferences. We propose a Quantum Probabilistic Graphical Model in order to predict human decisions under situations with high levels of uncertainty.Under the proposed network, if a node (event) is unobserved, then a particle can enter in a superposition state and produce interference effects. These effects provide some explanation in terms of cognition, since they can be seen as the feeling of confusion or ambiguity.This work also discusses the problem of creating a generalized quantum probabilistic model: the number of quantum parameters grows exponentially. We will see that for a given event, several outcomes are possible through quantum probability. A final question is posed and discussed: is it possible to find a method to assign quantum parameters in order to provide accurate predictions?