Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3):306-307 (2013)
AbstractPothos & Busemeyer (P&B) argue that classical probability (CP) fails to describe human decision processes accurately and should be supplanted by quantum probability. We accept the premise, but reject P&B's conclusion. CP is a prescriptive framework that has inspired a great deal of valuable research. Also, because CP is used across the sciences, it is a cornerstone of interdisciplinary collaboration
Similar books and articles
Envy, facts and justice: A critique of the treatment of envy in justice as fairness.Patrick Tomlin - 2008 - Res Publica 14 (2):101-116.
The limits of information.D. J. - 2001 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 32 (4):511-524.
A hole revolution, or are we back where we started?Oliver Pooley - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 37 (2):372-380.
Getting the Personal Perspective into View.Gloria Ayob - 2013 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 20 (2):127-130.
Meinong's Doctrine of the Modal Moment.Dale Jacquette - 1985 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 25 (1):423-438.
Envy and Self-worth: Amending Aquinas’s Definition of Envy.Timothy Perrine - 2011 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 85 (3):433-446.
The Hole in the Universe: How Scientists Peered Over the Edge of Emptiness and Found Everything.K. C. Cole - 2001 - Harcourt.
Determinism and modality.Carolyn Brighouse - 1997 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (4):465-481.
The colors and shapes of visual experiences.David M. Rosenthal - 1999 - In Denis Fisette (ed.), Consciousness and Intentionality: Models and Modalities of Attribution. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 95--118.
Getting Out of a Hole: Identity Individuality and Structuralism in Space-time Physics.Steven French - 2001 - Philosophica 67 (1).
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
No citations found.
References found in this work
Subtracting “ought” from “is”: Descriptivism versus normativism in the study of human thinking.Shira Elqayam & Jonathan St B. T. Evans - 2011 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (5):251-252.
The unbearable lightness of “Thinking”: Moving beyond simple concepts of thinking, rationality, and hypothesis testing.Gary L. Brase & James Shanteau - 2011 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (5):250-251.