Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40608277›Full record

ReviewPsychonomic bulletin & review2025

An overview of the quantum cognition research program.

Jiaqi Huang, Gunnar Epping, Jennifer S Trueblood, James M Yearsley, Jerome R Busemeyer, Emmanuel M Pothos

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jiaqi HuangDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA. huangajq@iu.edu.
Gunnar EppingDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Jennifer S TruebloodDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
James M YearsleyDepartment of Psychology, City, University of London, London, UK.
Jerome R BusemeyerDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Emmanuel M PothosDepartment of Psychology, City, University of London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The quantum cognition research program concerns the application of quantum probability theory (the rules for how to assign probabilities to events from quantum mechanics, without the physics) to cognitive modeling. We review quantum cognitive models in several areas of psychology, including conjunction/disjunction fallacies in probabilistic judgment, conceptual combinations, similarity, order effects on judgments, causal inference, the disjunction effect in decision making, measurement, and interference effects on judgments and decisions, memory, perception, and other judgment and decision-making applications. For each area, we first present the empirical findings that have motivated the application of quantum models, emphasizing any characteristics which are particularly puzzling or have resisted coherent theoretical explanations previously; we then discuss the quantum cognitive models, noting the key features of the models that help explain the empirical data; we finally cast a critical eye on the models and explore comparisons with non-quantum models.

Indexed as

CognitionModels, PsychologicalProbability TheoryQuantum TheoryDecision MakingHumansJudgmentMathematical psychologyProbabilistic reasoningQuantum cognition

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.