Quantum-like decision theory is by now a theoretically well-developed field (see e.g., Danilov, Lambert-Mogiliansky & Vergopoulos, 2018). We provide a first test of the predictions of an application of this approach to persuasion. One remarkable result entails that, in contrast to Bayesian persuasion, distraction rather than relevant information has a powerful potential to influence decision-making. We first develop a quantum decision model of choice between two uncertain alternatives. We derive the impact of persuasion by means of distractive questions and contrast them with the predictions of the Bayesian model. Next, we provide the results from a first test of the theory. We conducted an experiment where respondents choose between supporting either one of two projects to save endangered species. We tested the impact of persuasion in the form of questions related to different aspects of the uncertain value of the two projects. The experiment involved 1253 respondents divided into three groups: a control group, a first treatment group and the distraction treatment group. Our main result is that, in accordance with the predictions of quantum persuasion but in violation with the Bayesian model, distraction significantly affects decision-making. Population variables play no role. Some significant variations between subgroups are exhibited and discussed. The results of the experiment provide support for the hypothesis that the manipulability of people’s decision-making can to some extent be explained by the quantum indeterminacy of their subjective representation of reality.

中文翻译：

---

网络钓鱼（类似量子）的理论和实验证据‡

到目前为止，类量子决策理论是一个理论上已发展完善的领域（例如，参见Danilov，Lambert-Mogiliansky和Vergopoulos，2018年）。我们提供了对这种说服方法应用的预测的首次测试。一个令人瞩目的结果是，与贝叶斯的说服相反，分心而不是相关的信息具有强大的潜力来影响决策。我们首先建立两个不确定选择之间选择的量子决策模型。我们通过分散注意力的问题得出说服力的影响，并将其与贝叶斯模型的预测进行对比。接下来，我们提供该理论的首次测试的结果。我们进行了一项实验，受访者在支持两个项目之一中进行选择，以挽救濒危物种。我们以与两个项目的不确定性价值的不同方面相关的问题的形式测试了说服力的影响。该实验涉及1253名受访者，分为三组：对照组，第一治疗组和干扰治疗组。我们的主要结果是，根据量子说服力的预测，但与贝叶斯模型相违背，分心极大地影响了决策。总体变量不起作用。展示并讨论了亚组之间的一些重要变化。实验结果为以下假设提供了支持：人们的决策的可操纵性可以在一定程度上由他们对现实的主观表示的量子不确定性来解释。