IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v35y1998i1p69-73.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A brief note on a further refinement of the Condorcet Jury Theorem for heterogeneous groups

Author

Listed:
  • Kanazawa, Satoshi

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanazawa, Satoshi, 1998. "A brief note on a further refinement of the Condorcet Jury Theorem for heterogeneous groups," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 69-73, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:35:y:1998:i:1:p:69-73
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(97)00028-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lloyd Shapley & Bernard Grofman, 1984. "Optimizing group judgmental accuracy in the presence of interdependencies," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 329-343, January.
    2. Nitzan, Shmuel & Paroush, Jacob, 1982. "Optimal Decision Rules in Uncertain Dichotomous Choice Situations," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 23(2), pages 289-297, June.
    3. Karotkin, Drora & Nitzan, Shmuel, 1997. "On two properties of the marginal contribution of individual decisional skills," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 29-36, August.
    4. Owen, Guillermo & Grofman, Bernard & Feld, Scott L., 1989. "Proving a distribution-free generalization of the Condorcet Jury Theorem," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christian List, 2002. "On the Significance of the Absolute Margin," Public Economics 0211004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Malik Magdon-Ismail & Lirong Xia, 2018. "A Mathematical Model for Optimal Decisions in a Representative Democracy," Papers 1807.06157, arXiv.org.
    3. Gustaf Arrhenius & Klas Markstrom, 2024. "More, better or different? Trade-offs between group size and competence development in jury theorems," Papers 2404.09523, arXiv.org.
    4. Alpern, Steve & Chen, Bo, 2017. "The importance of voting order for jury decisions by sequential majority voting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(3), pages 1072-1081.
    5. Pivato, Marcus, 2017. "Epistemic democracy with correlated voters," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 51-69.
    6. Hummel, Patrick, 2011. "Information aggregation in multicandidate elections under plurality rule and runoff voting," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 1-6, July.
    7. Sapir, Luba, 2005. "Generalized means of jurors' competencies and marginal changes of jury's size," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 83-101, July.
    8. Sascha Kurz, 2018. "Importance In Systems With Interval Decisions," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-23, September.
    9. Satoshi Kanazawa, 1999. "Using Laboratory Experiments To Test Theories Of Corporate Behavior," Rationality and Society, , vol. 11(4), pages 443-461, November.
    10. Christian List, 2003. "What is special about the proportion? A research report on special majority voting and the classical Condorcet jury theorem," Public Economics 0304004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Ruth Ben-Yashar & Mor Zahavi, 2011. "The Condorcet jury theorem and extension of the franchise with rationally ignorant voters," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 435-443, September.
    12. Ruth Ben-Yashar & Shmuel Nitzan, 2017. "Are two better than one? A note," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 323-329, June.
    13. Felipe A. Csaszar & J. P. Eggers, 2013. "Organizational Decision Making: An Information Aggregation View," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2257-2277, October.
    14. Ruth Ben-Yashar, 2023. "An application of simple majority rule to a group with an even number of voters," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 83-95, January.
    15. Steve Alpern & Bo Chen, 2022. "Optimizing voting order on sequential juries: a median voter theorem and beyond," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(3), pages 527-565, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eyal Baharad & Jacob Goldberger & Moshe Koppel & Shmuel Nitzan, 2012. "Beyond Condorcet: optimal aggregation rules using voting records," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 113-130, January.
    2. Berg, Sven & Paroush, Jacob, 1998. "Collective decision making in hierarchies," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 233-244, May.
    3. Berg, Sven, 1997. "Indirect voting systems: Banzhaf numbers, majority functions and collective competence," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 557-573, September.
    4. Xiaohong Yu & Zhaoyang Sun, 2022. "The company they keep: When and why Chinese judges engage in collegiality," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 936-1002, December.
    5. Baharad, Eyal & Ben-Yashar, Ruth & Patal, Tal, 2020. "On the merit of non-specialization in the context of majority voting," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 128-133.
    6. Pivato, Marcus, 2017. "Epistemic democracy with correlated voters," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 51-69.
    7. Ruth Ben‐Yashar & Miriam Krausz & Shmuel Nitzan, 2018. "Government loan guarantees and the credit decision‐making structure," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(2), pages 607-625, May.
    8. Dhillon, Amrita & Kotsialou, Grammateia & Xefteris, Dimitris, 2021. "Information Aggregation with Delegation of Votes," SocArXiv ubk7p, Center for Open Science.
    9. Paul Schure & Francesco Passerelli & David Scoones, 2007. "When the Powerful Drag Their Feet," Department Discussion Papers 0703, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    10. Sven Berg & Antonio Marañon, 2001. "Collective Decisional Skill and Decisive Voting Games - Some Results," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(5), pages 389-403, September.
    11. BAHARAD, Eyal & BEN-YASHAR, Ruth & NITZAN, Shmuel, 2018. "Variable Competence and Collective Performance: Unanimity vs. Simple Majority Rule," Discussion paper series HIAS-E-80, Hitotsubashi Institute for Advanced Study, Hitotsubashi University.
    12. Karotkin, D. & Nitzan, S., 1993. "Some Peculiarities of group Decision Making in Teams," Papers 9303, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
    13. Joseph McMurray, 2017. "Ideology as Opinion: A Spatial Model of Common-Value Elections," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 108-140, November.
    14. Joseph Campbell & Alessandra Casella & Lucas de Lara & Victoria R. Mooers & Dilip Ravindran, 2022. "Liquid Democracy. Two Experiments on Delegation in Voting," NBER Working Papers 30794, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Ben-Yashar, Ruth & Nitzan, Shmuel, 2019. "Skill, value and remuneration in committees," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 93-95.
    16. Roy Baharad & Shmuel Nitzan & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2022. "One person, one weight: when is weighted voting democratic?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(2), pages 467-493, August.
    17. Ben Abramowitz & Nicholas Mattei, 2022. "Towards Group Learning: Distributed Weighting of Experts," Papers 2206.02566, arXiv.org.
    18. Luba Sapir, 1998. "The Optimality of the Expert and Majority Rules Under Exponentially Distributed Competence," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 19-36, August.
    19. Ben-Yashar, Ruth & Danziger, Leif, 2011. "Symmetric and asymmetric committees," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 440-447.
    20. Eyal Baharad & Ruth Ben-Yashar, 2021. "Judgment Aggregation by a Boundedly Rational Decision-Maker," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 903-914, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:35:y:1998:i:1:p:69-73. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505565 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.