# Yes, Prime Minister, question order does matter -- and it's certainly not classical! But is it quantum?

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.08930 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.08930/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 27 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 13 Sep 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Quantum Models for Psychological Measurements: An Unsolved Problem](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1403.3654/) (2014)
- [Quantum Probabilities as Behavioral Probabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1703.05691/) (2017)
- [Nondistributivity of human logic and violation of response replicability effect in cognitive psychology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.12946/) (2022)
- [Quantum probability updating from zero prior (by-passing Cromwell's rule)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08128/) (2017)
- [Quantum formalism for cognitive psychology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.06055/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Response to a poll can be manipulated by means of a series of leading questions. We show that such phenomena cannot be explained by use of classical probability theory, whereas quantum probability theory admits a possibility of offering an explanation. Admissible transformation rules in quantum probability, however, do impose some constraints on the modelling of cognitive behaviour, which are highlighted here. Focusing on a recent poll conducted by Ipsos on a set of questions posed by Sir Humphrey Appleby in an episode of the British political satire textitYes, Prime Minister, we show that the resulting data cannot be explained quite so simply using quantum rules, although it seems not impossible.