Edited version embargoed until 15.04.2020 Full version: Access restricted permanently due to 3rd party copyright restrictions. Restriction set on 15/04/2019 by AS, Doctoral College
dc.description.abstract
Quantum cognition is an interdisciplinary emerging field within the cognitive sciences which applies various axioms of quantum mechanics to cognitive processes. This thesis reports the results of several empirical investigations which focus on the applicability of quantum cognition to psychophysical perceptual processes. Specifically, we experimentally tested several a priori hypotheses concerning 1) constructive measurement effects in sequential perceptual judgments and 2) noncommutativity in the measurement of psychophysical observables. In order to establish the generalisability of our findings, we evaluated our prediction across different sensory modalities (i.e., visual versus auditory perception) and in cross-cultural populations (United Kingdom and India). Given the well-documented acute “statistical crisis” in science (Loken & Gelman, 2017a) and the various paralogisms associated with Fisherian/Neyman-Pearsonian null hypothesis significance testing, we contrasted various alternative statistical approaches which are based on complementary inferential frameworks (i.e., classical null hypothesis significance testing, nonparametric bootstrapping, model comparison based on Bayes Factors analysis, Bayesian bootstrapping, and Bayesian parameter estimation via Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations). This multimethod approach enabled us to analytically cross-validate our experimental results, thereby increasing the robustness and reliability of our inferential conclusions. The findings are discussed in an interdisciplinary context which synthesises knowledge from several prima facie separate disciplines (i.e., psychology, quantum physics, neuroscience, and philosophy). We propose a radical reconceptualization of various epistemological and ontological assumptions which are ubiquitously taken for granted (e.g., naïve and local realism/cognitive determinism). Our conclusions are motivated by recent cutting-edge findings in experimental quantum physics which are incompatible with the materialistic/deterministic metaphysical Weltanschauung internalised by the majority of scientists. Consequently, we argue that scientists need to update their nonevidence-based implicit beliefs in the light of this epistemologically challenging empirical evidence.
en_US
dc.language.iso
en
dc.publisher
University of Plymouth
dc.subject
Psychology
en_US
dc.subject
Neuroscience
en_US
dc.subject
Psychophysics
en_US
dc.subject
Quantum physics
en_US
dc.subject
Cognitive science
en_US
dc.subject
Perception
en_US
dc.subject
Decision-making
en_US
dc.subject
Noncommutativity
en_US
dc.subject
Epistemology
en_US
dc.subject
Nonduality
en_US
dc.subject.classification
PhD
en_US
dc.title
A psychophysical investigation of quantum cognition: An interdisciplinary synthesis
en_US
dc.type
Thesis
plymouth.version
non-publishable
en_US
dc.rights.embargodate
2020-04-15T12:38:03Z
dc.rights.embargodate
9999-09-09
dc.rights.embargoperiod
12 months
en_US
dc.type.qualification
Doctorate
en_US
rioxxterms.funder
Seventh Framework Programme
en_US
rioxxterms.identifier.project
Marie Curie Initial Training Network FP7-PEOPLE-2013-ITN, CogNovo, grant number: 604764
en_US
rioxxterms.version
NA
plymouth.orcid.id
0000-0002-1573-4651
en_US
rioxxterms.funder.project
8523d25e-35a8-43ab-bde6-269f9c15c305
en_US
Functions
AI translation:
Computerized text-to-speech synthesis:
Thesis Abstract.
Quantum cognition is an interdisciplinary emerging field within the cognitive sciences which applies various axioms of quantum mechanics to cognitive processes. This thesis reports the results of several empirical investigations which focus on the applicability of quantum cognition to psychophysical perceptual processes. Specifically, we experimentally tested several a priori hypotheses concerning 1) constructive measurement effects in sequential perceptual judgments and 2) noncommutativity in the measurement of psychophysical observables. In order to establish the generalisability of our findings, we evaluated our prediction across different sensory modalities (i.e., visual versus auditory perception) and in cross-cultural populations (United Kingdom and India). Given the well-documented acute “statistical crisis” in science (Loken & Gelman, 2017) and the various paralogisms associated with Fisherian/Neyman-Pearsonian null hypothesis significance testing, we contrasted various alternative statistical approaches which are based on complementary inferential frameworks (i.e., classical null hypothesis significance testing, nonparametric bootstrapping, model comparison based on Bayes Factors analysis, Bayesian bootstrapping, and Bayesian parameter estimation via Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations). This multimethod approach enabled us to analytically cross-validate our experimental results, thereby increasing the robustness and reliability of our inferential conclusions. The findings are discussed in an interdisciplinary context which synthesises knowledge from several prima facie separate disciplines (i.e., psychology, quantum physics, neuroscience, and philosophy). We propose a radical reconceptualization of various epistemological and ontological assumptions which are ubiquitously taken for granted (e.g., naïve and local realism/cognitive determinism). Our conclusions are motivated by recent cutting-edge findings in experimental quantum physics which are incompatible with the materialistic/deterministic metaphysical Weltanschauung internalised by the majority of scientists. Consequently, we argue that scientists need to update their nonevidence-based implicit beliefs in the light of this epistemologically challenging empirical evidence.
Quantum cognition is an interdisciplinary emerging field within the cognitive sciences which applies various axioms of quantum mechanics to cognitive processes. This thesis reports the results of several empirical investigations which focus on the applicability of quantum cognition to psychophysical perceptual processes. Specifically, we experimentally tested several a priori hypotheses concerning 1) constructive measurement effects in sequential perceptual judgments and 2) noncommutativity in the measurement of psychophysical observables. In order to establish the generalisability of our findings, we evaluated our prediction across different sensory modalities (i.e., visual versus auditory perception) and in cross-cultural populations (United Kingdom and India). Given the well-documented acute “statistical crisis” in science (Loken & Gelman, 2017) and the various paralogisms associated with Fisherian/Neyman-Pearsonian null hypothesis significance testing, we contrasted various alternative statistical approaches which are based on complementary inferential frameworks (i.e., classical null hypothesis significance testing, nonparametric bootstrapping, model comparison based on Bayes Factors analysis, Bayesian bootstrapping, and Bayesian parameter estimation via Markov chain Monte Carlo simulations). This multimethod approach enabled us to analytically cross-validate our experimental results, thereby increasing the robustness and reliability of our inferential conclusions. The findings are discussed in an interdisciplinary context which synthesises knowledge from several prima facie separate disciplines (i.e., psychology, quantum physics, neuroscience, and philosophy). We propose a radical reconceptualization of various epistemological and ontological assumptions which are ubiquitously taken for granted (e.g., naïve and local realism/cognitive determinism). Our conclusions are motivated by recent cutting-edge findings in experimental quantum physics which are incompatible with the materialistic/deterministic metaphysical Weltanschauung internalised by the majority of scientists. Consequently, we argue that scientists need to update their nonevidence-based implicit beliefs in the light of this epistemologically challenging empirical evidence.
The R code associated with various analyses used in this thesis can be found in the following repository: http://R-code.ml
Graphics
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_001_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_002_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_118_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_119_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_144_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_144_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_145_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_149_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_149_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_150_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_150_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_157_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_157_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_158_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_159_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_160_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_161_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_162_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_163_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_177_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_179_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_274_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_182_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_570_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_570_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_187_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_188_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_188_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_188_Image_0003
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_189_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_190_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_190_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_190_Image_0003
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_192_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_193_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_193_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_194_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_196_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_210_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_210_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_211_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_212_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_215_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_215_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_216_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_217_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_218_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_218_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_219_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_220_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_226_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_229_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_242_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_242_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_246_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_246_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_246_Image_0003
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_247_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_250_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_252_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_262_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_262_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_263_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_266_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_266_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_267_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_268_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_269_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_270_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_271_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_272_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_275_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_278_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_280_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_364_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_387_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_557_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_575_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_578_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_580_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_586_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_626_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_629_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_633_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_634_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_635_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_636_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_640_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_641_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_642_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_643_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_644_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_645_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_647_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_649_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_652_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_652_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_653_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_654_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_656_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_657_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_656_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_657_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_659_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_661_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_660_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_662_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_663_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_664_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_668_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_669_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_670_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_671_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_671_Image_0003
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_671_Image_0004
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_671_Image_0005
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_675_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_679_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_701_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_702_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_703_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_704_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_705_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_711_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_718_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_720_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_724_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_726_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_727_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_730_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_731_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_732_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_733_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_735_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_736_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_738_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_742_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_744_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_746_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_747_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_749_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_750_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_753_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_757_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_761_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_762_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_763_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_763_Image_0003
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_764_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_765_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_766_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_767_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_768_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_771_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_773_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_774_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_775_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_776_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_777_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_778_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_779_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_783_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_786_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_789_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_793_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_815_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_817_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_829_Image_0003
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_837_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_838_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_839_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_840_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_841_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_844_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_845_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_848_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_850_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_850_Image_0002
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_853_Image_0001
2019germann10263161phd_edited_Page_916_Image_0001
Thesis MindMap
Slide
Slide
Slide
Slide
Slide
Slide
Slide
References
Atmanspacher, H.. (2012). Dual-aspect monism à la Pauli and Jung perforates the completeness of physics. In Journal of Consciousness Studies (pp. 5–21)
“Dual-aspect monism and neutral monism offer interesting alternatives to mainstream positions concerning the mind-matter problem. both assume a domain underlying the mind-matter distinction, but they also differ in definitive ways. in the twentieth century, variants of both positions have been advanced by a number of protagonists. one of these variants, the dual-aspect monism due towolfgang pauli and carl gustav jung, will be described and commented on in detail. as a unique feature in the pauli-jung conception, the duality of mental and material aspects is specified in terms of a complementarity. this sounds innocent, but entails a number of peculiarities distinguishing their conjecture from other approaches.”
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.
“What type of probability theory best describes the way humans make judgments under uncertainty and decisions under conflict? although rational models of cognition have become prominent and have achieved much success, they adhere to the laws of classical probability theory despite the fact that human reasoning does not always conform to these laws. for this reason we have seen the recent emergence of models based on an alternative probabilistic framework drawn from quantum theory. these quantum models show promise in addressing cognitive phenomena that have proven recalcitrant to modeling by means of classical probability theory. this review compares and contrasts probabilistic models based on bayesian or classical versus quantum principles, and highlights the advantages and disadvantages of each approach.”
Hoffman, D. D.. (2016). The Interface Theory of Perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(3), 157–161.
“Perception is a product of evolution. our perceptual systems, like our limbs and livers, have been shaped by natural selection. the effects of selection on perception can be studied using evolutionary games and genetic algorithms. to this end, we define and classify perceptual strategies and allow them to compete in evolutionary games in a variety of worlds with a variety of fitness functions. we find that veridical perceptions-strategies tuned to the true structure of the world-are routinely dominated by nonveridical strategies tuned to fitness. veridical perceptions escape extinction only if fitness varies monotonically with truth. thus, a perceptual strategy favored by selection is best thought of not as a window on truth but as akin to a windows interface of a pc. just as the color and shape of an icon for a text file do not entail that the text file itself has a color or shape, so also our perceptions of space-time and objects do not entail (by the invention of space-time theorem) that objective reality has the structure of space-time and objects. an interface serves to guide useful actions, not to resemble truth. indeed, an interface hides the truth; for someone editing a paper or photo, seeing transistors and firmware is an irrelevant hindrance. for the perceptions of h. sapiens, space-time is the desktop and physical objects are the icons. our perceptions of space-time and objects have been shaped by natural selection to hide the truth and guide adaptive behaviors. perception is an adaptive interface.”
Loken, E., & Gelman, A.. (2017). Measurement error and the replication crisis. Science, 355(6325), 584–585.
“Measurement error adds noise to predictions, increases uncertainty in parameter estimates, and makes it more difficult to discover new phenomena or to distinguish among competing theories. a common view is that any study finding an effect under noisy conditions provides evidence that the underlying effect is particularly strong and robust. yet, statistical significance conveys very little information when measurements are noisy. in noisy research settings, poor measurement can contribute to exaggerated estimates of effect size. this problem and related misunderstandings are key components in a feedback loop that perpetuates the replication crisis in science.”
Pothos, E. M., & Busemeyer, J. R.. (2013). Can quantum probability provide a new direction for cognitive modeling?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(03), 255–274.
“Classical (bayesian) probability (cp) theory has led to an influential research tradition for modeling cognitive processes. cognitive scientists have been trained to work with cp principles for so long that it is hard even to imagine alternative ways to formalize probabilities. however, in physics, quantum probability (qp) theory has been the dominant probabilistic approach for nearly 100 years. could qp theory provide us with any advantages in cognitive modeling as well? note first that both cp and qp theory share the fundamental assumption that it is possible to model cognition on the basis of formal, probabilistic principles. but why consider a qp approach? the answers are that (1) there are many well-established empirical findings (e.g., from the influential tversky, kahneman research tradition) that are hard to reconcile with cp principles; and (2) these same findings have natural and straightforward explanations with quantum principles. in qp theory, probabilistic assessment is often strongly context- and order-dependent, individual states can be superposition states (that are impossible to associate with specific values), and composite systems can be entangled (they cannot be decomposed into their subsystems). all these characteristics appear perplexing from a classical perspective. however, our thesis is that they provide a more accurate and powerful account of certain cognitive processes. we first introduce qp theory and illustrate its application with psychological examples. we then review empirical findings that motivate the use of quantum theory in cognitive theory, but also discuss ways in which qp and cp theories converge. finally, we consider the implications of a qp theory approach to cognition for human rationality.”
Yearsley, J. M., & Pothos, E. M.. (2014). Challenging the classical notion of time in cognition: a quantum perspective. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281(1781), 20133056–20133056.
“All mental representations change with time. a baseline intuition is that mental representations have specific values at different time points, which may be more or less accessible, depending on noise, forgetting processes, etc. we present a radical alternative, motivated by recent research using the mathematics from quantum theory for cognitive modelling. such cognitive models raise the possibility that certain possibilities or events may be incompatible, so that perfect knowledge of one necessitates uncertainty for the others. in the context of time-dependence, in physics, this issue is explored with the so-called temporal bell (tb) or leggett-garg inequalities. we consider in detail the theoretical and empirical challenges involved in exploring the tb inequalities in the context of cognitive systems. one interesting conclusion is that we believe the study of the tb inequalities to be empirically more constrained in psychology than in physics. specifically, we show how the tb inequalities, as applied to cognitive systems, can be derived from two simple assumptions: cognitive realism and cognitive completeness. we discuss possible implications of putative violations of the tb inequalities for cognitive models and our understanding of time in cognition in general. overall, this paper provides a surprising, novel direction in relation to how time should be conceptualized in cognition.”
