Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-fnprw Total loading time: 1.245 Render date: 2022-08-12T16:49:49.909Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Processes models, environmental analyses, and cognitive architectures: Quo vadis quantum probability theory?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2013

Julian N. Marewski
Affiliation:
University of Lausanne, Quartier UNIL-Dorigny, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland. Julian.Marewski@unil.chhttp://www.hec.unil.ch/people/jmarewskiUlrich.Hoffrage@unil.chhttp://www.hec.unil.ch/people/uhoffrage
Ulrich Hoffrage
Affiliation:
University of Lausanne, Quartier UNIL-Dorigny, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland. Julian.Marewski@unil.chhttp://www.hec.unil.ch/people/jmarewskiUlrich.Hoffrage@unil.chhttp://www.hec.unil.ch/people/uhoffrage

Abstract

A lot of research in cognition and decision making suffers from a lack of formalism. The quantum probability program could help to improve this situation, but we wonder whether it would provide even more added value if its presumed focus on outcome models were complemented by process models that are, ideally, informed by ecological analyses and integrated into cognitive architectures.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Byrne, M. D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C. & Qin, Y. (2004) An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review 111:1036–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, J. R. & Lebiere, C. (2003) The Newell Test for a theory of cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26:587640.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, J. R. & Schooler, L. J. (1991) Reflections of the environment in memory. Psychological Science 2:396408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, N. & Gigerenzer, G. (2010) As-if behavioral economics: Neoclassical economics in disguise? History of Economic Ideas 18:133–66.Google Scholar
Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G. & Hertwig, R. (2006) The priority heuristic: Making choices without trade-offs. Psychological Review 113:409–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bröder, A. & Gaissmaier, W. (2007) Sequential processing of cues in memory-based multi-attribute decisions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14:895900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunswik, E. (1964) Scope and aspects of the cognitive problem. In: Contemporary approaches to cognition, ed. Bruner, J. S., Brunswik, E., Festinger, L., Heider, F., Muenzinger, K. F., Osgood, C. E. & Rapaport, D., pp. 531. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dougherty, M. R. P., Gettys, C. F. & Ogden, E. E. (1999) Minerva-DM: A memory processes model for judgments of likelihood. Psychological Review 106:180209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. (1996) On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky. Psychological Review 103:592–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U. & Kleinbölting, H. (1991) Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review 98:506–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. & Selten, R., ed. (2001) Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Griffiths, T. L., Kemp, C. & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2008) Bayesian models of cognition. In: Cambridge handbook of computational cognitive modeling, ed. Sun, R., pp. 59100. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hertwig, R., Hoffrage, U. & the ABC Research Group (2013) Simple heuristics in a social world. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hertwig, R., Hoffrage, U. & Martignon, L. (1999) Quick estimation: Letting the environment do the work. In: Simple heuristics that make us smart, Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M. & the ABC Research Group, pp. 209–34. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, E.J., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M. & Willemsen, M. (2008) Process models deserve process data: Comment on Brandstätter, Gigerenzer & Hertwig (2006). Psychological Review 115:263–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. & Tversky, A. (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marewski, J. N. & Mehlhorn, K. (2011) Using the ACT-R architecture to specify 39 quantitative process models of decision making. Judgment and Decision Making 6(6):439519.Google Scholar
Marewski, J. N., Pohl, R. F. & Vitouch, O. (2010) Recognition-based judgments and decisions: Introduction to the special issue (Vol. 1). Judgment and Decision Making 5:207–15.Google Scholar
Marewski, J. N. & Schooler, L. J. (2011) Cognitive niches: An ecological model of strategy selection. Psychological Review 118(3):393437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nellen, S. (2003) The use of the “take-the-best” heuristic under different conditions, modelled with ACT-R. In: Proceedings of the fifth international conference on cognitive modelling, ed. Detje, F., Dörner, D. & Schaub, H., pp. 171–76. Universitätsverlag Bamberg.Google Scholar
Oaksford, M. & Chater, N. (1998) Rational models of cognition. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pachur, T., Hertwig, R. & Rieskamp, J. (2013) The mind as an intuitive pollster: Frugal search in social spaces. In: Simple heuristics in a social world, ed. Hertwig, R., Hoffrage, U. & the ABC Research Group, pp. 261–91. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reisen, N., Hoffrage, U. & Mast, F. W. (2008) Identifying decision strategies in a consumer choice situation. Judgment and Decision Making 3:641–58.Google Scholar
Schooler, L. J. & Hertwig, R. (2005) How forgetting aids heuristic inference. Psychological Review 112(3):610–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1956) Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review 63:129–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sloman, S. A. (1996) The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 119:322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todd, P. M., Gigerenzer, G. & the ABC Research Group (2012) Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volz, K. G., Schooler, L. J. & von Cramon, D. Y. (2010) It just felt right: The neural correlates of the fluency heuristic. Consciousness and Cognition 19:829–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
1
Cited by

Linked content

Please note a has been issued for this article.

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Processes models, environmental analyses, and cognitive architectures: Quo vadis quantum probability theory?
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Processes models, environmental analyses, and cognitive architectures: Quo vadis quantum probability theory?
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Processes models, environmental analyses, and cognitive architectures: Quo vadis quantum probability theory?
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *