True contextuality in a psychophysical experiment

Recent crowdsourcing experiments have shown that true contextuality of the kind found in quantum mechanics can also be present in human behavior. In these experiments simple human choices were aggregated over large numbers of respondents, with each respondent dealing with a single context (set of questions asked). In this paper we present experimental evidence of contextuality in individual human behavior, in a psychophysical experiment with repeated presentations of visual stimuli in randomly varying contexts (arrangements of stimuli). The analysis is based on the Contextuality-by-Default (CbD) theory whose relevant aspects are reviewed in the paper. CbD allows one to detect contextuality in the presence of direct influences, i.e., when responses to the same stimuli have different distributions in different contexts. The experiment presented is also the first one in which contextuality is demonstrated for responses that are not dichotomous, with five options to choose among. CbD requires that random variables representing such responses be dichotomized before they are subjected to contextuality analysis. A theorem says that a system consisting of all possible dichotomizations of responses has to be contextual if these responses violate a certain condition, called nominal dominance. In our experiment nominal dominance was violated in all data sets, with very high statistical reliability established by bootstrapping.

[1]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Contextuality Analysis of the Double Slit Experiment (with a Glimpse into Three Slits) , 2018, Entropy.

[2]  Peter Bruza,et al.  Is There Something Quantum-Like about the Human Mental Lexicon? , 2009, INEX.

[3]  Akihito Soeda,et al.  Generalized monogamy of contextual inequalities from the no-disturbance principle. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[4]  R. Oliveira,et al.  Necessary conditions for extended noncontextuality in general sets of random variables , 2017, Journal of Mathematical Physics.

[5]  H. Thorisson Coupling, stationarity, and regeneration , 2000 .

[6]  J. Bell On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics , 1966 .

[7]  J. S. BELLt Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox , 2018 .

[8]  R. Griffiths What quantum measurements measure , 2017, 1704.08725.

[9]  N. Bohr II - Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[10]  Yoshiharu Tanaka,et al.  Violation of contextual generalization of the Leggett–Garg inequality for recognition of ambiguous figures , 2014, 1401.2897.

[11]  Samson Abramsky,et al.  The sheaf-theoretic structure of non-locality and contextuality , 2011, 1102.0264.

[12]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Exploration of Contextuality in a Psychophysical Double-Detection Experiment , 2016, QI.

[13]  Marco T'ulio Quintino,et al.  All noncontextuality inequalities for the n-cycle scenario , 2012, 1206.3212.

[14]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Proof of a Conjecture on Contextuality in Cyclic Systems with Binary Variables , 2015, 1503.02181.

[15]  C. Emary,et al.  Temporal quantum correlations and Leggett-Garg inequalities in multilevel systems. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[16]  E. Dzhafarov Selective influence through conditional independence , 2003 .

[17]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  When are probabilistic explanations possible? , 2005, Synthese.

[18]  Arthur Fine,et al.  Joint distributions, quantum correlations, and commuting observables , 1982 .

[19]  A. Zeilinger,et al.  Experimental non-classicality of an indivisible quantum system , 2011, Nature.

[20]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  A perturbation of CHSH inequality induced by fluctuations of ensemble distributions , 2000 .

[21]  Laurianne Sitbon,et al.  A probabilistic framework for analysing the compositionality of conceptual combinations , 2013, ArXiv.

[22]  Jerome R. Busemeyer,et al.  A Quantum Question Order Model Supported by Empirical Tests of an A Priori and Precise Prediction , 2013, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[23]  Janne Kujala,et al.  Probability, Random Variables, and Selectivity , 2013, 1312.2239.

[24]  Andrei Khrennikov Non-Kolmogorov probability models and modified Bell's inequality , 2000 .

[25]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Context-Content Systems of Random Variables: The Contextuality-by-Default Theory , 2015, 1511.03516.

[26]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Probabilistic Contextuality in EPR/Bohm-type Systems with Signaling Allowed , 2014, 1406.0243.

[27]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  On Selective Influences, Marginal Selectivity, and Bell/CHSH Inequalities , 2012, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[28]  P. Good,et al.  A Simple Test , 1994 .

[29]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Testing Contextuality in Cyclic Psychophysical Systems of High Ranks , 2016, QI.

[30]  C. Budroni,et al.  Temporal Quantum Correlations and Hidden Variable Models , 2015 .

[31]  D. Kaszlikowski,et al.  Entropic test of quantum contextuality. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[32]  Kohei Kishida,et al.  Contextuality, Cohomology and Paradox , 2015, CSL.

[33]  Thomas Filk,et al.  A mechanical model of a PR-Box , 2015, 1507.06789.

[34]  Albert Einstein,et al.  Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? , 1935 .

[35]  Richard M. Shiffrin,et al.  Context effects produced by question orders reveal quantum nature of human judgments , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  Jan-AAke Larsson,et al.  Contextuality in Three Types of Quantum-Mechanical Systems , 2014, 1411.2244.

[37]  R. Spekkens,et al.  Specker’s parable of the overprotective seer: A road to contextuality, nonlocality and complementarity , 2010 .

[38]  E. S. Pearson,et al.  THE USE OF CONFIDENCE OR FIDUCIAL LIMITS ILLUSTRATED IN THE CASE OF THE BINOMIAL , 1934 .

[39]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Snow Queen Is Evil and Beautiful: Experimental Evidence for Probabilistic Contextuality in Human Choices , 2017, Decision.

[40]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  True contextuality beats direct influences in human decision making. , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[41]  Garg,et al.  Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: Is the flux there when nobody looks? , 1985, Physical review letters.

[42]  Víctor H. Cervantes,et al.  Advanced Analysis of Quantum Contextuality in a Psychophysical Double-Detection Experiment , 2016, 1611.04184.

[43]  Jose L. Cereceda QUANTUM MECHANICAL PROBABILITIES AND GENERAL PROBABILISTIC CONSTRAINTS FOR EINSTEIN–PODOLSKY–ROSEN–BOHM EXPERIMENTS , 2000 .

[44]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Contextuality in canonical systems of random variables , 2017, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[45]  M. Horne,et al.  Experimental Consequences of Objective Local Theories , 1974 .

[46]  Andrei Khrennikov Contextualist viewpoint to Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger paradox , 2001 .

[47]  Ru Zhang,et al.  Is there contextuality in behavioural and social systems? , 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[48]  Matt Jones,et al.  On contextuality in behavioural data , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[49]  A. Cabello Simple explanation of the quantum violation of a fundamental inequality. , 2012, Physical review letters.

[50]  Janne Kujala,et al.  Probabilistic foundations of contextuality , 2016, 1604.08412.

[51]  Andrei Khrennikov,et al.  Bell-Boole Inequality: Nonlocality or Probabilistic Incompatibility of Random Variables? , 2008, Entropy.

[52]  Intervalos de confianza e intervalos de credibilidad para una proporción Confidence Intervals and Credibility Intervals for a Proportion , 2008 .

[53]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Contextuality-by-Default 2.0: Systems with Binary Random Variables , 2016, QI.

[54]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  On universality of classical probability with contextually labeled random variables , 2017, Journal of Mathematical Psychology.

[55]  Thomas Filk It is the Theory Which Decides What We Can Observe (Einstein) , 2016 .

[56]  D. Bohm,et al.  Discussion of Experimental Proof for the Paradox of Einstein, Rosen, and Podolsky , 1957 .

[57]  A. Fine Hidden Variables, Joint Probability, and the Bell Inequalities , 1982 .

[58]  A. Shimony,et al.  Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden Variable Theories. , 1969 .

[59]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Replacing Nothing with Something Special: Contextuality-by-Default and Dummy Measurements , 2017, 1703.06752.

[60]  M. A. Can,et al.  Simple test for hidden variables in spin-1 systems. , 2007, Physical review letters.