# On Contextuality in Behavioral Data

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1508.04751 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1508.04751/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 18 Aug 2015.

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

- [Generalised Winograd Schema and its Contextuality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.16498/) (2023)
- [Quantum-Like Contextuality in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16806/) (2024)
- [A Model of Anaphoric Ambiguities using Sheaf Theoretic Quantum-like Contextuality and BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.05720/) (2022)
- [Reply to comments arXiv:2512.07881 and arXiv:2601.06104 on quantum structure in human and AI-generated language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.25797/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Dzhafarov, Zhang, and Kujala (Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A 374, 20150099) reviewed several behavioral data sets imitating the formal design of the quantum-mechanical contextuality experiments. The conclusion was that none of these data sets exhibited contextuality if understood in the generalized sense proposed in Dzhafarov, Kujala, and Larsson (Found. Phys. 7, 762-782, 2015), while the traditional definition of contextuality does not apply to these data because they violate the condition of consistent connectedness (also known as marginal selectivity, no-signaling condition, no-disturbance principle, etc.). In this paper we clarify the relationship between (in)consistent connectedness and (non)contextuality, as well as between the traditional and extended definitions of (non)contextuality, using as an example the Clauser-Horn-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequalities originally designed for detecting contextuality in entangled particles.