Decision making under time pressure: an independent test of sequential sampling models

Choice probability and choice response time data from a risk-taking decision-making task were compared with predictions made by a sequential sampling model. The behavioral data, consistent with the model, showed that participants were less likely to take an action as risk levels increased, and that time pressure did not have a uniform effect on choice probability. Under time pressure, participants were more conservative at the lower risk levels but were more prone to take risks at the higher levels of risk. This crossover interaction reflected a reduction of the threshold within a single decision strategy rather than a switching of decision strategies. Response time data, as predicted by the model, showed that participants took more time to make decisions at the moderate risk levels and that time pressure reduced response time across all risk levels, but particularly at the those risk levels that took longer time with no pressure. Finally, response time data were used to rule out the hypothesis that time pressure effects could be explained by a fast-guess strategy

Applying Quantum Principles to Psychology

This article starts out with a detailed example illustrating the utility of applying quantum probability to psychology. Then it describes several alternative mathematical methods for mapping fundamental quantum concepts (such as state preparation, measurement, state evolution) to fundamental psychological concepts (such as stimulus, response, information processing). For state preparation, we consider both pure states and densities with mixtures. For measurement, we consider projective measurements and positive operator valued measurements. The advantages and disadvantages of each method with respect to applications in psychology are discussed.Comment: one of the aims of this review paper is to attract attention of experts in quantum information and probability (as well as in quantum foundations) to a new rapidly growing field of applications of quantum theory. The paper establishes the correspondence between concepts of quantum theory and concepts of cognitive science and psychology. Submitted to Physica Script

Markov versus quantum dynamic models of belief change during evidence monitoring

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Two different dynamic models for belief change during evidence monitoring were evaluated: Markov and quantum. They were empirically tested with an experiment in which participants monitored evidence for an initial period of time, made a probability rating, then monitored more evidence, before making a second rating. The models were qualitatively tested by manipulating the time intervals in a manner that provided a test for interference effects of the first rating on the second. The Markov model predicted no interference, whereas the quantum model predicted interference. More importantly, a quantitative comparison of the two models was also carried out using a generalization criterion method: the parameters were fit to data from one set of time intervals, and then these same parameters were used to predict data from another set of time intervals. The results indicated that some features of both Markov and quantum models are needed to accurately account for the results

Interference effects of categorization on decision making

a b s t r a c t Many decision making tasks in life involve a categorization process, but the effects of categorization on subsequent decision making has rarely been studied. This issue was explored in three experiments (N = 721), in which participants were shown a face stimulus on each trial and performed variations of categorization-decision tasks. On C-D trials, they categorized the stimulus and then made an action decision; on X-D trials, they were told the category and then made an action decision; on D-alone trials, they only made an action decision. An interference effect emerged in some of the conditions, such that the probability of an action on the D-alone trials (i.e., when there was no explicit categorization before the decision) differed from the total probability of the same action on the C-D or X-D trials (i.e., when there was explicit categorization before the decision). Interference effects are important because they indicate a violation of the classical law of total probability, which is assumed by many cognitive models. Across all three experiments, a complex pattern of interference effects systematically occurred for different types of stimuli and for different types of categorization-decision tasks. These interference effects present a challenge for traditional cognitive models, such as Markov and signal detection models, but a quantum cognition model, called the belief-action entanglement (BAE) model, predicted that these results could occur. The BAE model employs the quantum principles of superposition and entanglement to explain the psychological mechanisms underlying the puzzling interference effects. The model can be applied to many important and practical categorization-decision situations in life

Quantum principles in psychology: The debate, the evidence, and the future

The attempt to employ quantum principles for modeling cognition has enabled the introduction of several new concepts in psychology, such as the uncertainty principle, incompatibility, entanglement, and superposition. For many commentators, this is an exciting opportunity to question existing formal frameworks (notably classical probability theory) and explore what is to be gained by employing these novel conceptual tools. This is not to say that major empirical challenges are not there. For example, can we definitely prove the necessity for quantum, as opposed to classical, models? Can the distinction between compatibility and incompatibility inform our understanding of differences between human and non-human cognition? Are quantum models less constrained than classical ones? Does incompatibility arise as a limitation, to avoid the requirements from the principle of unicity, or is it an inherent (or essential?) characteristic of intelligent thought? For everyday judgments, do quantum principles allow more accurate prediction than classical ones? Some questions can be confidently addressed within existing quantum models. A definitive resolution of others will have to anticipate further work. What is clear is that the consideration of quantum cognitive models has enabled a new focus on a range of debates about fundamental aspects of cognition