# Testing quantum-like models of judgment for question order effect

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.04901 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1501.04901/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 19 Jan 2015.

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Tossing Quantum Coins and Dice](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.17007/) (2021)
- [Quantum Uncertainty in Decision Theory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.07877/) (2021)
- [A Quantum-like Model for Predicting Human Decisions in the Entangled Social Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.13902/) (2021)
- [Quantum Operation of Affective Artificial Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.08112/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Lately, so-called "quantum" models, based on parts of the mathematics of quantum mechanics, have been developed in decision theory and cognitive sciences to account for seemingly irrational or paradoxical human judgments. We consider here some such quantum-like models that address question order effects, i.e. cases in which given answers depend on the order of presentation of the questions. Models of various dimensionalities could be used, can the simplest ones be empirically adequate? From the quantum law of reciprocity, we derive new empirical predictions that we call the Grand Reciprocity equations, that must be satisfied by several existing quantum-like models, in their non-degenerate versions. Using substantial existing data sets, we show that these non-degenerate versions fail the GR test in most cases, which means that, if quantum-like models of the kind considered here are to work, it can only be in their degenerate versions. However, we suggest that the route of degenerate models is not necessarily an easy one, and we argue for more research on the empirical adequacy of degenerate quantum-like models in general.