Skip to main content
Log in

Three pseudo-paradoxes in ‘quantum’ decision theory: Apparent effects of observation on probability and utility

  • Published:
Theory and Decision Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In quantum domains, the measurement (or observation) of one of a pair of complementary variables introduces an unavoidable uncertainty in the value of that variable's complement. Such uncertainties are negligible in Newtonian worlds, where observations can be made without appreciably disturbing the observed system. Hence, one would not expect that an observation of a non-quantum probabilistic outcome could affect a probability distribution over subsequently possible states, in a way that would conflict with classical probability calculations. This paper examines three problems in which observations appear to affect the probabilities and expected utilities of subsequent outcomes, in ways which may appear paradoxical. Deeper analysis of these problems reveals that the anomalies arise, not from paradox, but rather from faulty inferences drawn from the observations themselves. Thus the notion of ‘quantum’ decision theory is disparaged.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bar-Hillel, M.: 1989, ‘How to solve probability teasers’,Philosophy of Science,56, 348–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copi, I.: 1968,Introduction to Logic, The Macmillan Company, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, A.: 1974, ‘On a problem in conditional probability’,Philosophy of Science,41, 204–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faber, R.: 1976, ‘Re-encountering a counter-intuitive probability’,Philosophy of Science,43, 283–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feynman, R.P., Leighton, R.B. and Sands, M.: 1963,The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freund, J.: 1965, ‘Puzzle or paradox’,The American Statistician,19, 29–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamow, G. and Stern, M.: 1958,Puzzle-Math, The Viking Press, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gridgeman, N.: 1963, ‘The pit of paradox’,New Scientist,21, 462–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffreys, H.: 1948,Theory of Probability, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 2nd edition.

  • Nalebuff, B.: Spring 1988, ‘Puzzles’,Journal of Economic Perspectives,2, 149–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nalebuff, B.: Winter 1989, ‘Puzzles’,Journal of Economic Perspectives,3, 171–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A.: 1969,Strategy and Conscience, Schocken Books, New York, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, L.: 1972, ‘Countering a counter-intuitive probability’,Philosophy of Science,39, 523–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxon, D.S.: 1968,Elementary Quantum Mechanics, Holden-Day, Inc., San Francisco, Ca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlee, E.: 1990, ‘The value of information in anticipated utility theory’,Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,3, 83–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrödinger, E.: 1947, ‘The Foundation of the Theory of Probability’,Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy,51, 51–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segal, U.: 1987, ‘The Ellsberg paradox and risk aversion: an anticipated utility approach’,International Economic Review,28, 175–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidenfeld, T.: 1979,Philosophical Problems of Statistical Inference, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, J.H.: 1992, ‘Kings and prisoners (and aces)’,Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association I, 203–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Todhunter, I.: 1865,A History of the Mathematical Theory of Probability, Macmillan & Co., London.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marinoff, L. Three pseudo-paradoxes in ‘quantum’ decision theory: Apparent effects of observation on probability and utility. Theor Decis 35, 55–73 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01075235

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01075235

Keywords

Navigation