A Study of Quantum Strategies for Newcomb's Paradox

Mihara, Takashi

doi:10.4236/ib.2010.21004

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the contrary, according to Savage's sure-thing principle, the decision maker should take both boxes, for the total amount of money is always larger for two boxes than for one box, irrespective of the amount of money in the opaque box. Although the Newcomb's paradox has extensively been discussed theoretically in the domain of philosophy (D. Lewis, 1979;Hurley, 1991;Campbell and Sowden, 1985), and theoretical physics (Piotrowski and Sładkowski, 2003;Mihara, 2010) only few experimental studies have been conducted in psychology and behavioral science Stanovich and West, 1999;Goldberg, 2005). In this study, we therefore conducted behavioral experiments of the Newcomb's problem with different reward sizes in the opaque box, and analyzed the decision makers' choices by utilizing a quantum decision theoretic model.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantum Decision-making in Newcomb’s Problem: Effect of Reward Size

Ishibashi-Ohmura¹,

Takahashi

2015

Neuroquantology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study experimentally examined people's decision making in the Newcomb's problem. We observed that Savage's sure-thing principle and Kolmogorovian law of probability was violated. Also, the degree of the violation increased as the reward size increased. By adopting quantum decision theory, we further quantified interference effect as a quantum phase factor. The quantum phase also depended on the reward size; i.e., it increased as the reward size in the unknown box in the Newcomb's problem increased. Future directions in the application of the present theory to studies in quantum decision theory and neuroeconomics are discussed.

show abstract