We continue to analyze matching of some basic constraints on human's decision making with quantum theory of measurement. As was found, quantum measurement theory based on the projection postulate does not match with combination of the question order effect (QOE) and the response replicability effect (RRE). This was the alarm signal for quantum-like modeling of decision making. Recently, it was shown that this objection to quantum-like modeling can be removed on the basis of the general measurement theory based on quantum instruments. In the present paper, the problem of combination QOE, RRE with the famous QQ-equality is analyzed. This equality was derived by Busemeyer and Wang and it was shown (in the joint paper with Solloway and Shiffrin) that statistical data from many social opinion polls satisfies it. Now, we construct quantum instruments satisfying QQE, RRE, and QQ-inequality. Moreover, we show that this model reproduces the statistics of the famous Clinton-Gore Poll data almost faithfully with a prior belief state independent of the question order. This model successfully removes the order effect from the data to determine the genuine distribution of the opinion to the Poll. Independently of modeling of the concrete psychological effects, the paper provides psychologist-friendly presentation of the theory of quantum instruments - the most general mathematical framework for quantum measurements. We hope that this theory will attract attention of psychologists and generate further psychological applications.
We continue to analyze matching of some basic constraints on human's decision making with quantum theory of measurement. As was found, quantum measurement theory based on the projection postulate does not match with combination of the question order effect (QOE) and the response replicability effect (RRE). This was the alarm signal for quantum-like modeling of decision making. Recently, it was shown that this objection to quantum-like modeling can be removed on the basis of the general measurement theory based on quantum instruments. In the present paper, the problem of combination QOE, RRE with the famous QQ-equality is analyzed. This equality was derived by Busemeyer and Wang and it was shown (in the joint paper with Solloway and Shiffrin) that statistical data from many social opinion polls satisfies it. Now, we construct quantum instruments satisfying QQE, RRE, and QQ-inequality. Moreover, we show that this model reproduces the statistics of the famous Clinton-Gore Poll data almost faithfully with a prior belief state independent of the question order. This model successfully removes the order effect from the data to determine the genuine distribution of the opinion to the Poll. Independently of modeling of the concrete psychological effects, the paper provides psychologist-friendly presentation of the theory of quantum instruments - the most general mathematical framework for quantum measurements. We hope that this theory will attract attention of psychologists and generate further psychological applications.
We continue to analyze basic constraints on human's decision making from the viewpoint of quantum measurement theory (QMT). As has been found, the conventional QMT based on the projection postulate cannot account for combination of the question order effect (QOE) and the response replicability effect (RRE). This was an alarm signal for quantum-like modeling of decision making. Recently, it was shown that this objection to quantum-like modeling can be removed on the basis of the general QMT based on quantum instruments. In the present paper we analyse the problem of combination of QOE, RRE, and the famous QQ-equality (QQE). This equality was derived by Busemeyer and Wang and it was shown (in the joint paper with Solloway and Shiffrin) that statistical data from many social opinion polls satisfies it. Now, we construct quantum instruments satisfying QOE, RRE, and QQE. The general features of our approach are formalized with postulates which generalize {\it Wang-Busemeyer} postulates for quantum-like modeling of decision making. Moreover, we show that our model closely reproduces the statistics of the famous Clinton-Gore Poll data with a prior belief state independent of the question order. This model successfully removes the order effect from the data to determine the genuine distribution of the opinions in the Poll. The paper also provides a psychologist-friendly introduction to the theory of quantum instruments - the most general mathematical framework for quantum measurements. We hope that this theory will attract attention of psychologists and will stimulate further applications.
Recently, quantum formalism started to be actively used outside of quantum physics: in psychology, decision-making, economics, finances, and social science. Human psychological behavior is characterized by a few basic effects; one of them is the question order effect (QOE). This effect was successfully modeled (Busemeyer–Wang) by representing questions A and B by Hermitian observables and mental-state transformations (back action of answering) by orthogonal projectors. However, then it was demonstrated that such representation cannot be combined with another psychological effect, known as the response replicability effect (RRE). Later, this no-go result was generalized to representation of questions and state transformations by quantum instruments of the atomic type. In light of these results, the possibility of using quantum formalism in psychology was questioned. In this paper, we show that, nevertheless, the combination of the QOE and RRE can be modeled within quantum formalism, in the framework of theory of non-atomic quantum instruments.
There has been a strong recent interest in applying quantum theory (QT) outside physics, including in cognitive science. We analyze the applicability of QT to two basic properties in opinion polling. The first property (response replicability) is that, for a large class of questions, a response to a given question is expected to be repeated if the question is posed again, irrespective of whether another question is asked and answered in between. The second property (question order effect) is that the response probabilities frequently depend on the order in which the questions are asked. Whenever these two properties occur together, it poses a problem for QT. The conventional QT with Hermitian operators can handle response replicability, but only in the way incompatible with the question order effect. In the generalization of QT known as theory of positive-operator-valued measures (POVMs), in order to account for response replicability, the POVMs involved must be conventional operators. Although these problems are not unique to QT and also challenge conventional cognitive theories, they stand out as important unresolved problems for the application of QT to cognition. Either some new principles are needed to determine the bounds of applicability of QT to cognition, or quantum formalisms more general than POVMs are needed.
In recent years, quantum mechanics has been actively used in areas outside of physics, such as psychology, sociology, theory of decision-making, game theory, and others. In particular, quantum mechanics is used to explain the paradoxes arising in cognitive psychology and decision making. Wang and Busemeyer invented a quantum model and approach as well as non-parametric equality (so-called QQ-equality), explaining the questions order effect. The primary objective of this note is to test the possibility to expand the Wang-Busemeyer model by considering questions which are mathematically represented by positive operator valued measures. We found that, for such observables, the QQ-equality can be violated. But, we also showed that, in principle, it is possible to reduce expanded model to the original Wang-Busemeyer model by expanding the context of the questions. This version of preprint is aimed to point out to annoying miscalculation in version 1. This miscalculation might mislead a reader who is not experienced in operating with POVMs. Otherwise the main line of construction and reasoning presented in version 1 is right and it can be easily completed by the reader on the basis of version 1 and the correction remark in version 2.
The aim of this paper is to promote quantum logic as one of the basic tools for analyzing human reasoning. We compare it with classical (Boolean) logic and highlight the role of violation of the distributive law for conjunction and disjunction. It is well known that nondistributivity is equivalent to incompatibility of logical variables — the impossibility to assign jointly the two-valued truth values to these variables. A natural question arises as to whether quantum logical nondistributivity in human logic can be tested experimentally. We show that testing the response replicability effect (RRE) in cognitive psychology is equivalent to testing nondistributivity — under the prevailing conjecture that the mental state update generated by observation is described as orthogonal projection of the mental state vector (the projective update conjecture of Wang and Busemeyer). A simple test of RRE is suggested. In contrast to the previous works in quantum-like modeling, we proceed in the state-dependent framework; in particular, distributivity, compatibility, and RRE are considered in a fixed mental state. In this framework, we improve the previous result on the impossibility to combine question order and response replicability effects by using (von Neumann–Lüders) projective measurements.
Question order effects are commonly observed in self-report measures of judgment and attitude. This article develops a quantum question order model (the QQ model) to account for four types of question order effects observed in literature. First, the postulates of the QQ model are presented. Second, an a priori, parameter-free, and precise prediction, called the QQ equality, is derived from these mathematical principles, and six empirical data sets are used to test the prediction. Third, a new index is derived from the model to measure similarity between questions. Fourth, we show that in contrast to the QQ model, Bayesian and Markov models do not generally satisfy the QQ equality and thus cannot account for the reported empirical data that support this equality. Finally, we describe the conditions under which order effects are predicted to occur, and we review a broader range of findings that are encompassed by these very same quantum principles. We conclude that quantum probability theory, initially invented to explain order effects on measurements in physics, appears to be a powerful natural explanation for order effects of self-report measures in social and behavioral sciences, too.