Nothing in the underlying article seems truly quantum in the sense that there are quantum physical principles contributing to the outcomes of the experiments. Instead, authors used quantum probabilistic-inspired mathematics to analyze their results. In that, there isn't really anything truly interesting; that's just data modelling (and quantum math is structured to make modelling easier).
Quantum mechanics does not permit parallel states to "communicate" in any way. The theory is purely linear (i.e. acts somewhat independently on all states), except for the wavefunction collapse phenomena. Any non-linenarity would, for instance, immediately imply that we can easily solve NP-complete problems using quantum computing:<p><a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9801041" rel="nofollow">http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9801041</a><p>So QM is probably a poor model for explaining human indecisiveness and irrationality. Much better is that it is simply the thing that evolution has come up with that can a) fit in our brains and b) yields proper results.
A good introduction might be this heavily cited paper from 2011 by another author, Busemeyer: "A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment errors"<p>(<a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=A+quantum+theoretical+explanation+for+probability+judgment+errors.+JR+Busemeyer" rel="nofollow">https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=A+quantum+theoretical+e...</a>)<p>He goes through the application of quantum probability, contrasts it with Komolgorov probability theory, and then walks through quite a few "anomalies" in cognitive psychology laying out specific models to deal with them.<p>The exposition of quantum vs. Komolgorov probability is clear and does not rely on specialized prior knowledge. The list of anomalies makes apparent the need for better modeling tools.
Greatly improved predictions across very diverse cognitive psychology experiments. For the actual papers see (<a href="http://www.thedocc.com/publications-2/" rel="nofollow">http://www.thedocc.com/publications-2/</a>).
Ugh, what a load of tripe.<p>First, there's no strong evidence that biological brains make use of quantum phenomena except insofar as those phenomena drive normal chemistry.<p>Second, if brains do make use of quantum phenomena in weird ways, the effect would not be visible at a level as abstract as decision making. Such processes operate at the level of hundreds of millions of neurons, at which point classical approximations are quite accurate. Any strange quantum phenomenon would operate at the level of single neurons, outside of which the quantum numbers grow so large as to approach classical statistics.<p>This quantum mysticism needs to stop. There are much better ways to explain psychological effects like indecision than a (horrifically tenuous) analogy to quantum physics.