Abstract
We prove a theorem which shows that a collection of experimental data of probabilistic weights related to decisions with respect to situations and their disjunction cannot be modeled within a classical probabilistic weight structure in case the experimental data contain the effect referred to as the ‘disjunction effect’ in psychology. We identify different experimental situations in psychology, more specifically in concept theory and in decision theory, and in economics (namely situations where Savage’s Sure-Thing Principle is violated) where the disjunction effect appears and we point out the common nature of the effect. We analyze how our theorem constitutes a no-go theorem for classical probabilistic weight structures for common experimental data when the disjunction effect is affecting the values of these data. We put forward a simple geometric criterion that reveals the non classicality of the considered probabilistic weights and we illustrate our geometrical criterion by means of experimentally measured membership weights of items with respect to pairs of concepts and their disjunctions. The violation of the classical probabilistic weight structure is very analogous to the violation of the well-known Bell inequalities studied in quantum mechanics. The no-go theorem we prove in the present article with respect to the collection of experimental data we consider has a status analogous to the well known no-go theorems for hidden variable theories in quantum mechanics with respect to experimental data obtained in quantum laboratories. Our analysis puts forward a strong argument in favor of the validity of using the quantum formalism for modeling the considered psychological experimental data as considered in this paper.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bruza, P.D., Gabora, L. (eds.): Special Issue: Quantum Cognition. J. Math. Psychol. 53, 303–452 (2009)
Bruza, P.D., Lawless, W., van Rijsbergen, C.J., Sofge, D. (eds.): Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Quantum Interaction, March 26–28, 2007, Stanford University, SS-07-08. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2007)
Bruza, P.D., Lawless, W., van Rijsbergen, C.J., Sofge, D., Coecke, B., Clark, S. (eds.): Proceedings of the Second Quantum Interaction Symposium, University of Oxford, March 26–28, 2008. College Publications, London (2008)
Bruza, P.D., Sofge, D., Lawless, W., van Rijsbergen, C.J., Klusch, M. (eds.): Proceedings of the Third International Symposium, QI 2009, Saarbrücken, Germany, March 25–27, 2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5494. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)
Aerts, D., Aerts, S.: Applications of quantum statistics in psychological studies of decision processes. Found. Sci. 1, 85–97 (1994). Reprinted in: B.C. van Fraassen (ed.), Topics in the Foundation of Statistics, Springer, Dordrecht
Aerts, D., Broekaert, J., Smets, S.: The liar paradox in a quantum mechanical perspective. Found. Sci. 4, 115–132 (1999)
Aerts, D., Broekaert, J., Smets, S.: A quantum structure description of the liar paradox. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 3231–3239 (1999)
Aerts, D., Aerts, S., Broekaert, J., Gabora, L.: The violation of Bell inequalities in the macroworld. Found. Phys. 30, 1387–1414 (2000)
Gabora, L., Aerts, D.: Contextualizing concepts using a mathematical generalization of the quantum formalism. J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell. 14, 327–358 (2002)
Aerts, D., Czachor, M.: Quantum aspects of semantic analysis and symbolic artificial intelligence. J. Phys. A 37, L123–L132 (2004)
Aerts, D., Gabora, L.: A theory of concepts and their combinations I: the structure of the sets of contexts and properties. Kybernetes 34, 167–191 (2005)
Aerts, D., Gabora, L.: A theory of concepts and their combinations II: a Hilbert space representation. Kybernetes 34, 192–221 (2005)
Broekaert, J., Aerts, D., D’Hooghe, B.: The generalised Liar Paradox: a quantum model and interpretation. Found. Sci. 11, 399–418 (2006)
Aerts, D.: General quantum modeling of combining concepts: a quantum field model in Fock space. Archive address and link: http://arxiv.org/abs/0705.1740 (2007)
Aerts, D.: Quantum structure in cognition. J. Math. Psychol. 53, 314–348 (2009)
Aerts, D.: Quantum particles as conceptual entities: a possible explanatory framework for quantum theory. Found. Sci. 14, 361–411 (2009)
Aerts, D., Aerts, S., Gabora, L.: Experimental evidence for quantum structure in cognition. In: Bruza, P.D., Sofge, D., Lawless, W., van Rijsbergen, C.J., Klusch, M. (eds.) Proceedings of QI 2009-Third International Symposium on Quantum Interaction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5494, pp. 59–70. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)
Aerts, D., D’Hooghe, B.: Classical logical versus quantum conceptual thought: examples in economics, decision theory and concept theory. In: Bruza, P.D., Sofge, D., Lawless, W., van Rijsbergen, C.J., Klusch, M. (eds.) Proceedings of QI 2009-Third International Symposium on Quantum Interaction. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5494, pp. 128–142 Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)
Aerts, D.: Quantum interference and superposition in cognition: Development of a theory for the disjunction of concepts. In: Aerts, D., D’Hooghe, B., Note, N. (eds.) Worldviews, Science and Us: Bridging Knowledge and Its Implications for Our Perspectives of the World. World Scientific, Singapore (2010)
Aerts, D.: Interpreting quantum particles as conceptual entities. Int. J. Theor. Phys. (2010). doi:10.1007/s10773-010-0440-0
Aerts, D., Broekaert, J., Gabora, L.: A case for applying an abstracted quantum formalism to cognition. New Ideas Psychol. (2010). doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2010.06.002
Aerts, D., D’Hooghe, B.: A quantum-conceptual explanation of violations of expected utility in economics. In: Aerts, D., D’Hooghe, B., Note, N. (eds.) Worldviews, Science and Us: Bridging Knowledge and Its Implications for Our Perspectives of the World. World Scientific, Singapore (2010)
von Neumann, J.: Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik. Chapter IV.1,2. Springer, Berlin. (1932)
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., Rosen, N.: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 47, 777–780 (1935)
Bohr, N.: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 48, 696–702 (1935)
Gleason, A.M.: Measures on the closed subspaces of a Hilbert space. J. Math. Mech. 6, 885–893 (1957)
Jauch, J., Piron, C.: Can hidden variables be excluded from quantum mechanics? Helv. Phys. Acta 36, 827–837 (1963)
Bell, J.S.: On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox. Physics 1, 195–200 (1964)
Bohm, D., Bub, J.: A proposed solution of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics by a hidden variable theory. Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 453–469 (1966)
Bell, J.S.: On the problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 447–452 (1966)
Kochen, S., Specker, E.P.: The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. J. Math. Mech. 17, 59–87 (1967)
Jauch, J.M., Piron, C.: Hidden variables revisited. Rev. Mod. Phys. 40, 228–229 (1968)
Gudder, S.P.: Hidden variables in quantum mechanics reconsidered. Rev. Mod. Phys. 40, 229–231 (1968)
Bohm, D., Bub, J.: On hidden variables-A reply to comments by Jauch and Piron and by Gudder. Rev. Mod. Phys. 40, 235–236 (1968)
Clauser, J.F., Horne, M.A., Shimony, A., Holt, R.A.: Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880–884 (1969)
Gudder, S.P.: On hidden variable theories. J. Math. Phys. 11, 431–436 (1970)
Clauser, J.F., Horne, M.A.: Experimental consequences of objective local theories. Phys. Rev. D 10, 526–535 (1974)
Accardi, L., Fedullo, A.: On the statistical meaning of complex numbers in quantum mechanics. Lett. Nuovo Cimento 34, 161–172 (1982)
Aspect, A., Grangier, P., Roger, G.: Experimental realization of Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen–Bohm Gedankenexperiment: a new violation of Bell’s Inequalities. Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91–94 (1982)
Aspect, A., Dalibard, J., Roger, G.: Experimental test of Bell’s Inequalities using time-varying analyzers. Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804–1807 (1982)
Kolmogorov, A.N.: Foundations of the Theory of Probability. Chelsea Publishing, New York (1956)
Accardi, L.: The probabilistic roots of the quantum mechanical paradoxes. In: Diner, S., Fargue, D., Lochak, G., Selleri, F. (eds.) The Wave-Particle Dualism: A Tribute to Louis de Broglie on his 90th Birthday, pp. 297–330. Springer, Dordrecht (1984)
Aerts, D.: A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics and a macroscopical situation that violates Bell inequalities. In: Mittelstaedt, P., Stachow, E.W. (eds.): Recent Developments in Quantum Logic, Grundlagen der Exacten Naturwissenschaften, Wissenschaftverlag, vol. 6, pp. 235–251. Bibliographisches Institut, Mannheim (1985)
Aerts, D.: A possible explanation for the probabilities of quantum mechanics. J. Math. Phys. 27, 202–210 (1986)
Aerts, D.: The origin of the non-classical character of the quantum probability model. In: Blanquiere, A., Diner, S., Lochak, G. (eds.) Information, Complexity, and Control in Quantum Physics, pp. 77–100. Springer, Wien-New York (1987)
Redhead, M.: Incompleteness, Nonlocality and Realism. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1987)
Pitowsky, I.: Quantum Probability, Quantum Logic. Lecture Notes in Physics, vol. 321. Springer, Heidelberg (1989)
Hampton, J.A.: Overextension of conjunctive concepts: Evidence for a unitary model for concept typicality and class inclusion. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 14, 12–32 (1988)
Hampton, J.A.: Inheritance of attributes in natural concept conjunctions. Mem. Cogn. 15, 55–71 (1987)
Hampton, J.A.: The combination of prototype concepts. In: Schwanenugel, P. (ed.) The Psychology of Word Meanings. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1991)
Storms, G., De Boeck, P., Van Mechelen, I., Geeraerts, D.: Dominance and non-commutativity effects in concept conjunctions: extensional or intensional basis? Mem. Cogn. 21, 752–762 (1993)
Hampton, J.A.: Conjunctions of visually-based categories: overextension and compensation. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 22, 378–396 (1996)
Hampton, J.A.: Conceptual combination: conjunction and negation of natural concepts. Mem. Cogn. 25, 888–909 (1997)
Storms, G., de Boeck, P., Hampton, J.A., van Mechelen, I.: Predicting conjunction typicalities by component typicalities. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 6, 677–684 (1999)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgments of and by representativeness. In: Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., Tversky, A. (eds.): Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Extension versus intuitive reasoning: the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychol. Rev. 90, 293–315 (1983)
Hampton, J.A.: Disjunction of natural concepts. Mem. Cogn. 16, 579–591 (1988)
Carlson, B.W., Yates, J.F.: Disjunction errors in qualitative likelihood judgment. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 44, 368–379 (1989)
Tversky, A., Shafir, E.: The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. Psychol. Sci. 3, 305–309 (1992)
Bar-Hillel, M., Neter, E.: How alike is it versus how likely is it: a disjunction fallacy in probability judgments. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 65, 1119–1131 (1993)
Croson, R.T.A.: The disjunction effect and reason-based choice in games. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 80, 118–133 (1999)
Kühberger, A., Komunska, D., Perner, J.: The disjunction effect: Does it exist for two-step gambles? Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 85, 250–264 (2001)
Li, S., Taplin, J.E.: Examining whether there is a disjunction effect in prisoner’s dilemma games. Chin. J. Psychol. 44, 25–46 (2002)
van Dijk, E., Zeelenberg, M.: The discounting of ambiguous information in economic decision making. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 16, 341–352 (2003)
van Dijk, E., Zeelenberg, M.: The dampening effect of uncertainty on positive and negative emotions. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 19, 171–176 (2006)
Bauer, M.I., Johnson-Laird, P.N.: How diagrams can improve reasoning. Psychol. Sci. 4, 372–378 (2006)
Lambdin, C., Burdsal, C.: The disjunction effect reexamined: relevant methodological issues and the fallacy of unspecified percentage comparisons. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 103, 268–276 (2007)
Bagassi, M., Macchi, L.: The ‘vanishing’ of the disjunction effect by sensible procrastination. Mind & Society 6, 41–52 (2007)
Hristova, E., Grinberg, M.: Disjunction effect in prisoner’s dilemma: Evidences from an eye-tracking study. In: Cogsci 2008, Proceedings, Washington, July 22–26 (2008)
Allais, M.: Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l’école Américaine. Econometrica 21, 503–546 (1953)
Ellsberg, D.: Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. Q. J. Economics 75, 643–669 (1961)
Savage, L.J.: The Foundations of Statistics. Wiley, New York (1954)
von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1944)
Busemeyer, J.R., Wang, Z., Townsend, J.T.: Quantum dynamics of human decision-making. J. Math. Psychol. 50, 220–241 (2006)
Pothos, E.M., Busemeyer, J.R.: A quantum probability explanation for violations of ‘rational’ decision theory. Proc. R. Soc. B (2009)
Khrennikov, A., Haven, E.: Quantum mechanics and violations of the sure-thing principle: the use of probability interference and other concepts. J. Math. Psychol. 53, 378–388 (2009)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aerts, D., D’Hooghe, B. & Haven, E. Quantum Experimental Data in Psychology and Economics. Int J Theor Phys 49, 2971–2990 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10773-010-0477-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10773-010-0477-0