Periodic Reporting for period 1 - QDM (Quantum Decision Making)
Berichtszeitraum: 2016-10-01 bis 2018-09-30
Regarding the first major project objective, belief updating, there is a striking difference between belief updating based on CPT and QPT. With the former, belief updating is constrained by Bayes law, so that initially unlikely hypotheses are unlikely to be supported too much, regardless of the evidence that comes to light. With the latter, belief updating can involve large jumps from prior to posterior beliefs. Does human decision making sometimes involve such large jumps? Regarding the second major project objective, we often have an intuitive sense of rumination, such that we go back and forth the possible alternatives before reaching a decision. How can we empirically measure such a process and how can we model it?
Regarding the project strand corresponding to rumination, we created scenarios for which the hypothetical protagonists were faced with a complex decision (e.g. how to spend their Friday evening), with multiple, non-matched pros and cons for each of the two decision outcomes. Participants were asked to consider this information and reach a decision. We developed two ways to measure the extent of rumination. First, we employed a technology called mouse-tracking, which keeps track of mouse movements. By using a presentation format which allowed viewing of the arguments for each decision outcome only when the mouse moved in different screen regions, we could measure how participants drifted across different sets of arguments. Second, with collaborators in Germany and Switzerland, we created an eye tracking version of the experiment, such that we continuously tracked eye fixations as participants considered the available information. The latter provided a richer data set, which we have modelled with a QPT framework for dynamical change. An innovative aspect of this framework is that it incorporates open system dynamics. In QPT, dynamical change with open system dynamics is characteristic of situations where the system interacts with its environment. Psychologically, such situations are ones for which the consideration of a problem is not restricted to problem-specific information, but is also influenced by the general knowledge/ experience of the decision maker. Our main results were that in many cases participants’ deliberation shows evidence of rumination (multiple cycles concerning the consideration of one set of arguments vs. the other) and that the dynamical pattern of rumination was also consistent with oscillation followed by stabilization – this latter characteristic indicates open-system dynamics. We provided a sophisticated open-systems QTP model for these results, showing that the dynamics of QPT (including the open systems elaboration) provide a good framework for modelling rumination. A notable aspect of the QPT model fits was that, in some cases, QPT model parameters could be employed to predict the eventual participant decision. This is a significant finding, since it is surprising that eye tracking structure can be related to decisions (only the gaze cascade effect has provided any indication that this might be the case so far).
Non-academic impact is already promising. We have been in touch with the BBC in the UK, regarding the application of a quantum-like framework to understand persistent disagreement in modern politics. We have also been discussing applications with the (American) Office of Naval Research Global, with a view to apply quantum-like principles for modelling cooperation between multiple agents.