From Classical Rationality to Quantum Cognition

Yoshihiro Maruyama

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Emmanuel M. Pothos, Oliver James Waddup, Prince Kouamelan Kouassi +1 more

There has been a growing trend to develop cognitive models based on the mathematics of quantum theory. A common theme in the motivation of such models has been findings which apparently challenge the applicability of classical formalisms, specifically ones based on classical probability theory. Classical probability theory has had a singularly important place in cognitive theory, because of its (in general) descriptive success but, more importantly, because in decision situations with low, equivalent stakes it offers a multiply justified normative standard. Quantum cognitive models have had a degree of descriptive success and proponents of such models have argued that they reveal new intuitions or insights regarding decisions in uncertain situations. However, can quantum cognitive models further benefit from normative justifications analogous to those for classical probability models? If the answer is yes, how can we determine the rational status of a decision, which may be consistent with quantum theory, but inconsistent with classical probability theory? In this paper, we review the proposal from Pothos, Busemeyer, Shiffrin, and Yearsley (2017), that quantum decision models benefit from normative justification based on the Dutch Book Theorem, in exactly the same way as models based on classical probability theory.

Andrei Yu. Khrennikov

Lucio Tonello, Paolo Grigolini A

The bounded rationality mainstream is based on interesting experiments showing human behaviors violating classical probability (CP) laws. Quantum probability (QP) has been shown to successfully figure out such issues, supporting the hypothesis that quantum mechanics is the central fundamental pillar for brain function and cognition emergence. We discuss the decision-making model (DMM), a paradigmatic instance of criticality, which deals with bounded rationality issues in a similar way as QP, generating choices that cannot be accounted by CP. We define this approach as criticality-induced bounded rationality (CIBR). For some aspects, CIBR is even more satisfactory than QP. Our work may contribute to considering criticality as another possible fundamental pillar in order to improve the understanding of cognition and of quantum mechanics as well.