• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Behavioral and Brain Sciences >Quantum principles in psychology: The debate, the evidence, and the future
【24h】

Quantum principles in psychology: The debate, the evidence, and the future

机译：心理学中的量子原理：辩论，证据和未来

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The attempt to employ quantum principles for modeling cognition has enabled the introduction of several new concepts in psychology, such as the uncertainty principle, incompatibility, entanglement, and superposition. For many commentators, this is an exciting opportunity to question existing formal frameworks (notably classical probability theory) and explore what is to be gained by employing these novel conceptual tools. This is not to say that major empirical challenges are not there. For example, can we definitely prove the necessity for quantum, as opposed to classical, models? Can the distinction between compatibility and incompatibility inform our understanding of differences between human and nonhuman cognition? Are quantum models less constrained than classical ones? Does incompatibility arise as a limitation, to avoid the requirements from the principle of unicity, or is it an inherent (or essential?) characteristic of intelligent thought? For everyday judgments, do quantum principles allow more accurate prediction than classical ones? Some questions can be confidently addressed within existing quantum models. A definitive resolution of others will have to anticipate further work. What is clear is that the consideration of quantum cognitive models has enabled a new focus on a range of debates about fundamental aspects of cognition.
机译：利用量子原理对认知进行建模的尝试使得引入了心理学中的几个新概念，例如不确定性原理，不相容性，纠缠和叠加。对于许多评论员来说，这是一个令人兴奋的机会，可以质疑现有的正式框架（尤其是经典概率论），并探索通过采用这些新颖的概念性工具将获得什么。这并不是说没有重大的经验挑战。例如，相对于经典模型，我们可以肯定地证明量子模型的必要性吗？相容性和不相容性之间的区别是否可以使我们了解人类和非人类认知之间的差异？量子模型的约束是否比经典模型的约束少？为避免避免来自单一性原则的要求，不相容性是否会成为一种限制，还是聪明的思维固有的（或必不可少的）特征？对于日常的判断，量子原理比经典的原理能提供更准确的预测吗？在现有的量子模型中可以自信地解决一些问题。要最终确定其他人的解决方案，必须期待进一步的工作。显而易见的是，对量子认知模型的考虑使人们重新关注了有关认知基本方面的一系列辩论。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Behavioral and Brain Sciences》 |2013年第3期|310-327|共18页
  • 作者

    Emmanuel M. Pothos; Jerome R. Busemeyer;

  • 作者单位

    Department of Psychology, City University London, London EC1V0HB, United Kingdom;

    Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号