IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0187733.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is there a problem with quantum models of psychological measurements?

Author

Listed:
  • Jerome Busemeyer
  • Zheng Wang

Abstract

This article presents the results of an experiment, called the ABA experiment, designed to test a fundamental prediction of quantum probability theory when applied to human judgments and decisions. The prediction concerns the effect of one measurement on another when the measurements are incompatible (i.e., the answers to the measurements depend on the order of these measurements). After an initial measurement of an opinion on an issue, A, the answer to a second measurement on the same issue A immediately afterwards will certainly be the same as the first. However, according to the uncertainty principle, if a measurement of opinion on issue A is followed by an incompatible measurement on another issue, B, then the answer to a second measurement on issue A will become uncertain. This prediction was tested with 325 participants on a wide range of 12 different set of issues that were previously shown to be incompatible. Contrary to previous claims published in this journal, the empirical findings support the prediction of quantum probability theory applied to human judgments.

Suggested Citation

  • Jerome Busemeyer & Zheng Wang, 2017. "Is there a problem with quantum models of psychological measurements?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-11, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0187733
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187733
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0187733
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0187733&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0187733?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0187733. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.