EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Quantum-like models cannot account for the conjunction fallacy

Thomas Boyer-Kassem, Sébastien Duchêne and Eric Guerci ()
Additional contact information
Thomas Boyer-Kassem: TiLPS - Tilburg Center for Logic, General Ethics, and Philosophy of Science - https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/ - Tilburg University
Eric Guerci: GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (... - 2019) - COMUE UCA - COMUE Université Côte d'Azur (2015 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UCA - Université Côte d'Azur

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Human agents happen to judge that a conjunction of two terms is more probable than one of the terms, in contradiction with the rules of classical probabilities—this is the conjunction fallacy. One of the most discussed accounts of this fallacy is currently the quantum-like explanation, which relies on models exploiting the mathematics of quantum mechanics. The aim of this paper is to investigate the empirical adequacy of major quantum-like models which represent beliefs with quantum states. We first argue that they can be tested in three different ways, in a question order effect configuration which is different from the traditional conjunction fallacy experiment. We then carry out our proposed experiment, with varied methodologies from experimental economics. The experimental results we get are at odds with the predictions of the quantum-like models. This strongly suggests that this quantum-like account of the conjunction fallacy fails. Future possible research paths are discussed.

Keywords: Quantum-like model; Experimental economics; Empirical adequacy; Conjunction fallacy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-exp
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01380684
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed

Published in Theory and Decision, Springer Verlag, 2016, 81 (4), pp.479-510. ⟨10.1007/s11238-016-9549-9⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01380684/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Quantum-like models cannot account for the conjunction fallacy (2016) Downloads
Working Paper: Quantum-like Models Cannot Account for the Conjunction Fallacy (2015) Downloads
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01380684

DOI: 10.1007/s11238-016-9549-9

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().

 
Page updated 2021-02-18
Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01380684