On Amelioration Of Human Cognitive Biases In Binary Decision Making We study the behavior of cognitively biased humans in decision making under the binary hypothesis testing framework. Rationality of humans is modeled via prospect theory, which utilizes a value function and a weight function to characterize humansxe2x80x99 distorted perception of costs and probabilities. Following psychology studies which suggest that humans make decisions by choosing an alternative that yields the minimum expected costs based on received evidence, we show that a cognitively biased human employs an likelihood ratio test (LRT) in the prospect theoretic hypothesis testing framework. We further propose three approaches to ameliorate the side effects of cognitive biases and help humans make higher quality decisions. Simulations are presented to corroborate the theoretical results.

On the Irrationality of Being in Two Minds This article presents a general framework that allows irrational decision making to be theoretically investigated and simulated. Rationality in human decision making under uncertainty is normatively prescribed by the axioms of probability theory in order to maximize utility. However, substantial literature from psychology and cognitive science shows that human decisions regularly deviate from these axioms. Bistable probabilities are proposed as a principled and straight forward means for modeling (ir)rational decision making, which occurs when a decision maker is in xe2x80x9ctwo mindsxe2x80x9d. We show that bistable probabilities can be formalized by positiveoperatorvalued projections in quantum mechanics. We found that (1) irrational decision making necessarily involves a wider spectrum of causal relationships than rational decision making, (2) the accessible information turns out to be greater in irrational decision making when compared to rational decision making, and (3) irrational decision making is quantumlike because it violates the Bellxe2x80x93Wigner polytope.