Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Voters’ Preferences in a Quantum Framework

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Quantum Models in Social Science

Abstract

Politics is regarded as a vital area of social science and strongly relies on the assumptions of voters’ rationality and as such the stability of preferences (at least in decisions that are made simultaneously). The phenomenon of divided government that has dominated the US political arena for many election periods over the last 40 years is not consistent with the notion of stable preferences of voters. The authors claim that there is no well defined ranking of their preferences on their utility function of “political preferences.” Recently, this problem has been handled by using the novel approach based on the formalism of quantum mechanics. The theory of quantum decision-making is applicable to the modeling of irrational and biased behavior of voters as well as to the nonseparability of their preferences. Irrationality, biases, and nonseparability lead to a deeper uncertainty than classical probabilistic uncertainty. In particular, quantum probability describes well the violation of Bayesian rationality. The authors model this nonclassical uncertainty in voters’ preferences by using elements of the fundamental quantum information structures such as superposition and entanglement. The chapter is an introduction to the quantum modeling of the behavior of an electorate with unstable preferences (contextual preferences) and the authors use one of the most potent theories of adaptive dynamics, namely, the theory of open quantum systems. In this model a voter’s decision is created in the process of interaction with an information bath in which the mass media play the key role.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aerts, D., d’Hooghe, B., & Haven, E. (2010). Quantum experimental data in psychology and economics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 49(12), 2971–2990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aerts, D., Sozzo, S., & Tapia, J. (2014). Identifying quantum structures in the Ellsberg Paradox. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 53, 3666–3682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, R. M., & Schousen, M. (1993). Policy moderation or conflicting expectations? Testing the intentional model of split-ticket voting. American Politics Quarterly, 21, 410–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arterton, F. (1984). Media politics. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asano, M., Ohya, M., Tanaka, Y., Basieva, I., & Khrennikov, A. (2011). Quantum-like model of brain’s functioning: Decision making from decoherence. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 281, 56–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagarello, F. (2015). An operator view on alliances in politics. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 75(2), 564–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagarello, F., & Haven, E. (2015). Towards a formalization of a two traders market with information exchange. Physica Scripta, 90 015203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S. J., Kilgour, M., & Zwicker, W. S. (1997). The paradox of multiple elections. Social Choice and Welfare, 15, 211–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busemeyer, J. R., & Bruza, P. D. (2012). Quantum models of cognition and decision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Busemeyer, J. R., Pothos, E. M., Franco, R., & Trueblood, J. S. (2011). A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgement errors. Psychological Review, 118(2), 193–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busemeyer, J. R., Wang, Z., Khrennikov, A., & Basieva, I. (2014). Applying quantum principles to psychology. Physica Scripta, 014007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busemeyer, J. R., Wang, Z., & Townsend, T. J. (2006). Quantum dynamics of human decision-making. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50, 220–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conte, E., Khrennikov, A. Y., Todarello, O., Federici, A., Mendolicchio, L., & Zbilut, J.P. (2009). Mental states follow quantum mechanics during perception and cognition of ambiguous figures. Open Systems and Information Dynamics, 16, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danilov, V. I., & Lambert-Mogiliansky, A. (2010). Expected utility theory under non-classical uncertainty. Theory and Decision, 68, 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Barros, J. A., & Suppes, P. (2009). Quantum mechanics, interference and the brain. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 306–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dzhafarov, E. N., & Kujala, J. V. (2012). Quantum entanglement and the issue of selective influences in psychology. An overview. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7620, 184–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enelow, J., & Melvin, J. H. (1984). The spatial theory of voting: An introduction. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finke, D., & Fleig, A. (2013). The Merits of adding complexity: non-separable preferences in spatial models of European Union politics. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 25(4), 546–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiorina, M. P. (1992). Divided government. New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco, R. (2009). The conjunction fallacy and interference effects. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 415–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graber, D. (1989). Mass media and American politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haven, E., & Khrennikov, A. (2013). Quantum social science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haven, E., & Khrennikov, A. (2016). A brief introduction to quantum formalism. In E. Haven & A. Khrennikov (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of quantum models in social science: Applications and grand challenges. Palgrave: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingarden, R.S., Kossakowski, A., & Ohya, M. (1997). Information dynamics and open systems: Classical and quantum approach. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Khrennikov, A. (2016). Why quantum? In E. Haven & A. Khrennikov (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of quantum models in social science: Applications and grand challenges. Palgrave: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khrennikov, A., Basieva, I., Dzhafarov, E. N., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2014). Quantum models for psychological measurements: An unsolved problem. PLoS ONE, 9(10), e110909. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0110909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khrennikov, A., & Haven, E. (2009). Quantum mechanics and violations of the sure-thing principle: The use of probability interference and other concepts. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 53, 378–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khrennikova, P. (2014a). Order effect in a study on US voters’ preferences: Quantum framework representation of the observables. Physica Scripta, 014010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khrennikova, P. (2014b). A quantum framework for ‘Sour Grapes’ in cognitive dissonance. In H. Atmanspacher, E. Haven, et al. (Eds) (Vol. 8369, pp. 270–280). Lecture notes in computer science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khrennikova, P., & Haven, E. (2015). Instability of political preferences and the role of mass-media: A dynamical representation in quantum framework. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 374(2058), 20150106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khrennikova, P., Haven, E., & Khrennikov, A. (2014). An application of the theory of open quantum systems to model the dynamics of party governance in the US political system. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 53(4), 1346–1360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolmogorov, A. (1950). Foundations of probability. New York: Chelsea Publishing Company (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacy, D. (2001). A Theory of nonseparable preferences in survey responses. American Journal of Political Science, 45(2), 239–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacy, D., & Niou, E. (1998). Elections in Double-Member districts with nonseparable voter preferences. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 10, 89–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lacy, D., & Niou, E. (2000). A problem with referendums. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12(1), 5–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohya, M., & Tanaka, Y. (2016). Adaptive dynamics and an optical illusion. In E. Haven & A. Khrennikov (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of quantum models in social science: Applications and grand challenges. Palgrave: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohya, M., & Volovich, I. (2011). Mathematical foundations of quantum information and computation and its applications to nano-and bio-systems. Heidelberg, Berlin, New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Plotnitsky, A. (2009). Epistemology and probability: Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger and the nature of quantum-theoretical thinking. Heidelberg, Berlin, New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pothos, E. M., & Busemeyer, J. (2009). A quantum probability explanation for violations of “rational” decision theory. Proceedings of the Royal society B, 276(1165), 2171–2178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. E., Brown, R. D., Bruce, J. M., & Overby, M. (1999). Party balancing and voting for Congress in the 1996 National Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 43(3), 737–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trueblood, J. S., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2011). A quantum probability model for order effects on inference. Cognitive Science, 35(8), 1518:1552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunctive fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1953). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2013). A quantum question order model supported by empirical tests of an a priori and precise prediction. Topics in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 689–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zorn C., & Smith, C. (2011). Pseudo-classical nonseparability and mass politics in Two-Party systems. In D. Song, et al. (eds.) (Vol. 7052, pp. 83–94). Lecture notes in computer science.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and IQSCS, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK

    Polina Khrennikova

  2. School of Business and IQSCS, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

    Emmanuel Haven

Authors
  1. Polina Khrennikova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emmanuel Haven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Polina Khrennikova .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, University of Leicester School of Management, Leicester, United Kingdom

    Emmanuel Haven

  2. Vaexjoe-Kalmar, Sweden

    Andrei Khrennikov

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Khrennikova, P., Haven, E. (2017). Voters’ Preferences in a Quantum Framework. In: Haven, E., Khrennikov, A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Quantum Models in Social Science. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-49276-0_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-49276-0_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-49275-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-49276-0

  • eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation