Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T12:26:31.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Beyond quantum probability: Another formalism shared by quantum physics and psychology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2013

Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov  and
Janne V. Kujala
Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907. [email protected]://www2.psych.purdue.edu/~ehtibar
Janne V. Kujala
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Information Technology, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä FI-40014, Finland. [email protected]://users.jyu.fi/~jvkujala
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is another meeting place for quantum physics and psychology, both within and outside of cognitive modeling. In physics it is known as the issue of classical (probabilistic) determinism, and in psychology it is known as the issue of selective influences. The formalisms independently developed in the two areas for dealing with these issues turn out to be identical, opening ways for mutually beneficial interactions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , June 2013 , pp. 283 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aspect, A. (1999) Bell's inequality tests: More ideal than ever. Nature 398:189–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basoalto, R. M. & Percival, I. C. (2003) BellTest and CHSH experiments with more than two settings. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical & General 36:7411–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, J. (1964) On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics 1:195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clauser, J. F., Horne, M. A., Shimony, A. & Holt, R. A. (1969) Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories. Physical Review Letters 23:880–84.Google Scholar
Dzhafarov, E. N. (2003) Selective influence through conditional independence. Psychometrika 68:7–26.Google Scholar
Dzhafarov, E. N. & Kujala, J. V. (2010) The joint distribution criterion and the distance tests for selective probabilistic causality. Frontiers in Quantitative Psychology and Measurement 1:151.Google Scholar
Dzhafarov, E. N. & Kujala, J. V. (2012a) Quantum entanglement and the issue of selective influences in psychology: An overview. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 7620: 184–95.Google Scholar
Dzhafarov, E. N. & Kujala, J. V. (2012b) Selectivity in probabilistic causality: Where psychology runs into quantum physics. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 56:54–63.Google Scholar
Dzhafarov, E. N. & Kujala, J. V. (in press a) All-possible-couplings approach to measuring probabilistic context. PLOS ONE (available as arXiv:1209.3430 [math.PR].Google Scholar
Dzhafarov, E. N. & Kujala, J. V. (in press b) Order-distance and other metric-like functions on jointly distributed random variables. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society. (available as arXiv:1110.1228 [math.PR]).Google Scholar
Fine, A. (1982) Joint distributions, quantum correlations, and commuting observables. Journal of Mathematical Physics 23:1306–10.Google Scholar
Kujala, J. V. & Dzhafarov, E. N. (2008) Testing for selectivity in the dependence of random variables on external factors. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 52:128–44.Google Scholar
Stapp, H. P. (1975) Bell's theorem and world process. Nuovo Cimento B 29:270–76.Google Scholar
Sternberg, S. (1969) The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. In: Attention and Performance II. Acta Psychologica, ed. Koster, W. G., 30:276–315.Google Scholar
Townsend, J. T. (1984) Uncovering mental processes with factorial experiments. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 28:363–400.Google Scholar
Townsend, J. T. & Schweickert, R. (1989) Toward the trichotomy method of reaction times: Laying the foundation of stochastic mental networks. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 33:309–27.Google Scholar
Werner, R. F. & Wolf, M. M. (2001a) All multipartite Bell correlation inequalities for two dichotomic observables per site. arXiv:quant-ph/0102024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werner, R. F. & Wolf, M. M. (2001b) Bell inequalities and entanglement. arXiv:quant-ph/0107093.Google Scholar