一种新决策模型——量子决策模型

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01365

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

近10年以来, 一些学者基于量子理论研究思想与方法探索出了量子决策模型。由于该模型独特的理论结构, 它可被用于解释传统决策理论所难以解释的问题, 尤其是个体在不确定情况下的决策行为。该模型解释了诸如分离效应、分类决策的干涉效应以及合取谬误等传统决策模型很难解释的问题, 研究者已经证实其中一种称为量子问题等式的决策模型可以精确地预测决策中的顺序效应。作为一个有助于分析心理学中决策现象的新研究领域, 量子决策模型具有深入研究的理论意义和实践意义。

关键词: 量子, 决策, 模型, 概率

Abstract:

During the recent decade, quantum decision-making models were established based on the mathematical structure and methodologies of quantum mechanics. Owing to its unique theoretical structure, the quantum decision-making models can be applied to explain problems that violate the classical decision models, especially for judgments under uncertainty and decisions under conflicts. Quantum decision-making models have been used to explain phenomena such as disjunction effect, conjunction fallacy and interference of categorization on decision making which are difficult to account for with classical decision models. A model called quantum question equality has been tested for its accurate prediction of order effects. Being a new research field contributing to analysis of decision making, quantum decision-making models worth further investigations both in theoretical and applicative levels.

Key words: quantum, decision making, model, probability

中图分类号:

B841.2

辛潇洋, 徐晨虹, 陈宏玉, 李瑛. (2018). 一种新决策模型——量子决策模型. 心理科学进展 , 26(8), 1365-1373.

XIN Xiaoyang, XU Chenhong, CHEN Hongyu, LI Ying. (2018). Quantum models for decision making. Advances in Psychological Science, 26(8), 1365-1373.

图/表 6

图1 薛定谔的猫

图2 双缝衍射路径简图

表1 分类-决策实验的部分实验结果(资料来源：Busemeyer & Bruza, 2012)

C-then-D					D-alone
p (G)	p (A\|G)	p (B)	p (A\|B)	p_T(A)	p (A)
0.17	0.41	0.83	0.63	0.59	0.69

图3 分类决策实验的路径简图

图4 Linda问题的几何投影解释图(注：彩图见电子版)

图5 量子问题等式统计结果图(资料来源：Busemeyer & Wang, 2015)

参考文献 47

1	顾樵 . ( 2014). 量子力学Ⅰ. 北京: 科学出版社.
2	李红, 谢松法 . ( 2013). 复变函数与积分变换 (第4版). 北京: 高等教育出版社.
3	刘程浩, 徐富明, 王伟, 李燕, 史燕伟 . ( 2015). 概率判断中的合取谬误. 心理科学进展, 23( 6), 967-978. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2015.00967 URL
4	罗俊明 . ( 2002). 概率论与数理统计. 郑州: 郑州大学出版社.
5	史荣昌, 魏丰 . ( 2010). 矩阵分析 (第3版). 北京: 北京理工大学出版社.
6	苏汝铿 . ( 2002). 量子力学 (第2版). 北京: 高等教育出版社.
7	孙炯, 王万义, 赫建文 . ( 2010). 泛函分析. 北京: 高等教育出版社.
8	汪祚军, 李纾 . ( 2008). 行为决策中出现的分离效应. 心理科学进展, 16( 4), 513-517.
9	曾谨言 . ( 2014). 量子力学教程 (第3版). 北京: 科学出版社.
10	Aerts, D . ( 2009). Quantum structure in cognition. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53( 5), 314-348. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.04.005 URL
11	Aerts, D., & Gabora, L . ( 2005). A theory of concepts and their combinations II: A Hilbert space representation. Kybernetes, 34( 1-2), 192-221. doi: 10.1108/03684920510575807 URL
12	Aerts D., Gabora L., & Sozzo S . ( 2013). Concepts and their dynamics: A quantum-theoretic modeling of human thought. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5( 4), 737-772. doi: 10.1111/tops.12042 URL pmid: 24039114
13	Aerts D., Sozzo S., & Veloz T . ( 2016). New fundamental evidence of non-classical structure in the combination of natural concepts. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A, 374(2058), 20150095.
14	Artemenkov, S. L . ( 2006). Kansei versus extensional reasoning: The scientific illusion of the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Kansei ( pp. 8-11). Fukuoka, Japan.
15	Asano M., Basieva I., Khrennikov A., Ohya M., & Tanaka Y . ( 2012). Quantum-like generalization of the Bayesian updating scheme for objective and subjective mental uncertainties. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56( 3), 166-175. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2012.02.003 URL
16	Atmanspacher, H., & Filk, T. . ( 2010). A proposed test of temporal nonlocality in bistable perception. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 54( 3), 314-321. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.12.001 URL
17	Bagassi, M., & Macchi, L . ( 2006). Pragmatic approach to decision making under uncertainty: The case of the disjunction effect. Thinking & Reasoning, 12( 3), 329-350. doi: 10.1080/13546780500375663 URL
18	Baron, J . ( 1988). Thinking and deciding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19	Blutner R., Pothos E. M., & Bruza P . ( 2013). A quantum probability perspective on borderline vagueness. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5( 4), 711-736. doi: 10.1111/tops.12041 URL pmid: 24039093
20	Brainerd C. J., Wang Z., & Reyna V. F . ( 2013). Superposition of episodic memories: Overdistribution and quantum models. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5( 4), 773-799. doi: 10.1111/tops.12039 URL pmid: 24027175
21	Bruza P., Kitto K., Nelson D., & McEvoy C . ( 2009). Is there something quantum-like about the human mental lexicon? Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53( 5), 363-377.
22	Bruza P. D., Wang Z., & Busemeyer J. R . ( 2015). Quantum cognition: A new theoretical approach to psychology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19( 7), 383-393. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.05.001 URL pmid: 26058709
23	Busemeyer J. R., & Bruza, P. D. .( 2012) . Quantum models of cognition and decision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24	Busemeyer, J. R., & Wang, Z. . ( 2015). What is quantum cognition, and how is it applied to psychology? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24( 3), 163-169. doi: 10.1177/0963721414568663 URL
25	Busemeyer J. R., Wang Z., Khrennikov A., & Basieva I . ( 2014). Applying quantum principles to psychology. Physica Scripta, 2014, 014007. doi: 10.1088/0031-8949/2014/T163/014007 URL
26	Busemeyer J. R., Wang Z., & Lambert-Mogiliansky A . ( 2009). Empirical comparison of Markov and quantum models of decision making. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53( 5), 423-433. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.03.002 URL
27	Busemeyer J. R., Wang Z., & Townsend J. T . ( 2006). Quantum dynamics of human decision-making. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50( 3), 220-241. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2006.01.003 URL
28	Chater N., Tenenbaum J. B., & Yuille A . ( 2006). Probabilistic models of cognition: Conceptual foundations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10( 7), 287-291. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.05.007 URL pmid: 16807064
29	De Barros, J. A., & Suppes, P . ( 2009). Quantum mechanics, interference, and the brain. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53( 5), 306-313. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2009.03.005 URL
30	Gilboa, I . ( 2009). Theory of decision under uncertainty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31	Lewinski, P . ( 2015). Commentary: Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1832.
32	Li S., Jiang C. M., Dunn J. C., & Wang Z. J . ( 2012). A test of “reason-based” and “reluctance-to-think” accounts of the disjunction effect. Information Sciences, 184( 1), 166-175 doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2011.09.002 URL
33	Li, S., & Taplin, J . ( 2002). Examining whether there is a disjunction effect in prisoner's dilemma games. Chinese Journal of Psychology, 44( 1), 25-46.
34	Moore, D. W . ( 2002). Measuring new types of question-order effects: Additive and subtractive. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66( 1), 80-91. doi: 10.1086/338631 URL
35	Pothos, E. M., & Busemeyer, J. R . ( 2009). A quantum probability explanation for violations of 'rational' decision theory. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 276( 1665), 2171-2178. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0121 URL pmid: 19324743
36	Pothos E. M., Busemeyer J. R., & Trueblood J. S . ( 2013). A quantum geometric model of similarity. Psychological Review, 120( 3), 679-696. doi: 10.1037/a0033142 URL pmid: 23915087
37	Savage L J . ( 1954). The Foundations of Statistics. New York: Wiley.
38	Sun Y., Li S., & Li Y. M . ( 2008). Reexamining the role of the description of problem texts in the disjunction effect. The Journal of Psychology, 142( 3), 261-265. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.142.3.261-266 URL pmid: 18589936
39	Tenenbaum J. B., Griffiths T. L., & Kemp C . ( 2006). Theory-based Bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10( 7), 309-318. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.05.009 URL pmid: 16797219
40	Townsend J. T., Smith J. S., Wenger M. J., & Silva K. M . ( 2000). Exploring the relations between categorization and decision making with regard to realistic face stimuli. Pragmatics & Cognition, 8( 1), 83-106.
41	Trueblood, J. S., & Busemeyer, J. R . ( 2012). A quantum probability model of causal reasoning. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 138. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00138 URL pmid: 3350941
42	Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D . ( 1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185( 4157), 1124-1131. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 URL pmid: 17835457
43	Tversky, A., & Shafir, E . ( 1992). The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. Psychological Science, 3( 5), 305-309. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00678.x URL
44	Wang, Z., & Busemeyer, J. R . ( 2013). A quantum question order model supported by empirical tests of an A priori and precise prediction. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5, 689-710.
45	Wang, Z., & Busemeyer, J. R . ( 2016). Interference effects of categorization on decision making. Cognition, 150, 133-149. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.01.019 URL pmid: 26896726
46	Wang Z. J., Li S., & Jiang C. M . ( 2012). Emotional response in a disjunction condition. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33( 1), 71-78.
47	Yearsley, J. M., & Busemeyer, J. R . ( 2016). Quantum cognition and decision theories: A tutorial. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 74, 99-116. doi: 10.1016/j.jmp.2015.11.005 URL

[1]	温秀娟, 马毓璟, 谭斯祺, 李芸, 刘文华. 身体还是认知努力的损害?抑郁症努力奖赏动机评估及计算模型应用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2025, 33(1): 107-122.
[2]	温聪聪. 惩罚对齐法：测量不变性检验的新方法[J]. 心理科学进展, 2025, 33(1): 176-190.
[3]	李兴珊, 张淇玮, 黄林洁琼. 中文词汇语义加工过程的计算模拟与实验验证[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(9): 1379-1392.
[4]	匡仪, 黄元娜, 马家涛, 尹述飞. 时空框架效应的理论与应用探索[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(9): 1416-1429.
[5]	肖悦, 刘红云, 徐永泽. 密集追踪成对数据分析的模型建构探索[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(9): 1450-1462.
[6]	苏涛, 曾浩文, 钟晓琳, 马文聪, 陈修德. 祸福相依：自恋型领导对下属效能双面效应的元分析[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(9): 1463-1487.
[7]	梁淑静, 杨光勇. 穷则思变, 富则思安? 金钱稀缺与富足感知对个体风险决策的影响[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(8): 1233-1249.
[8]	李世豪, 张文悦, 符国群. 刷碗少的人请买花: 夫妻贡献不均与家庭享乐性消费[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(8): 1250-1264.
[9]	何婷, 胡惠南, 乔璐, 杨靓靓, 李明英, 蔺秀云. 父母应对社会化如何影响儿童青少年适应：基于长时与实时时间轴的视角[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(8): 1342-1353.
[10]	周蕾, 林浇敏, 陈艺琦, 梁泳超, 古晨妍, 孙祺章. 不确定性跨期决策视角下绿色行为的心理机制及干预[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(7): 1048-1056.
[11]	李育辉, 杨晨露. 团队时间领导的概念内涵及其对团队和个体效能的影响机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(7): 1073-1086.
[12]	詹紫薇, 王梦梦, 索涛, 蒋艳菊. “一个连续过程”与“三个阶段”：抑郁青少年情绪失调的原因探析[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(6): 928-938.
[13]	周琦玮, 李倩, 梁爽. 员工对企业数字化转型的反应研究: 基于压力的理论视角[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(4): 594-615.
[14]	岳佳莹, 刘欣怡, 张孟可, 陈旭. 母亲的依恋风格影响对婴儿敏感性的认知过程[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(4): 627-638.
[15]	褚昕宇, 王泽军. 竞技运动专家的认知优势及其形成机制——基于自动性特点和抽象化表征[J]. 心理科学进展, 2024, 32(4): 689-699.