↓ Skip to main content

A macroscopic violation of no-signaling in time inequalities? How to test temporal entanglement with behavioral observables

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A macroscopic violation of no-signaling in time inequalities? How to test temporal entanglement with behavioral observables
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01061
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrizio E. Tressoldi, Markus A. Maier, Vanessa L. Buechner, Andrei Khrennikov

Abstract

In this paper we applied for the first time the no-signaling in time (NSIT) formalism discussed by Kofler and Brukner (2013) to investigate temporal entanglement between binary human behavioral unconscious choices at t1 with binary random outcomes at t2. NSIT consists of a set of inequalities and represents mathematical conditions for macro-realism which require only two measurements in time. The analyses of three independent experiments show a strong violation of NSIT in two out of three of them, suggesting the hypothesis of a quantum-like temporal entanglement between human choices at t1 with binary random outcomes at t2. We discuss the potentialities of using NSIT to test temporal entanglement with behavioral measures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 27%
Student > Bachelor 2 18%
Other 1 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 9%
Professor 1 9%
Other 2 18%
Unknown 1 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 36%
Neuroscience 2 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Physics and Astronomy 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 November 2015.
All research outputs
#12,736,411
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,417
of 29,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,041
of 263,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#256
of 565 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 565 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.