IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v55y2008i2p190-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Classifying interdependence in multidimensional binary preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Hodge, Jonathan K.
  • TerHaar, Micah

Abstract

When individual preferences over multiple dimensions are interdependent, the resulting collective decisions can be unsatisfactory and even paradoxical. The notion of separability formalizes this idea of interdependence, and preferences that are completely free from interdependence are said to be separable. In this paper, we develop a mechanism for classifying preferences according to the extent to which they achieve or fail to achieve the desirable property of separability. We show that binary preferences over multiple dimensions are surprisingly complex, in that their interdependence structures defy the most natural attempts at characterization. We also extend previous results pertaining to the rarity of separable preferences by showing that the probability of complete nonseparability approaches 1 as the number of dimensions increases without bound.

Suggested Citation

  • Hodge, Jonathan K. & TerHaar, Micah, 2008. "Classifying interdependence in multidimensional binary preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 190-204, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:55:y:2008:i:2:p:190-204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(07)00076-5
    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. F. P. Murphy, 1981. "A Note on Weak Separability," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(4), pages 671-672.
    2. Jonathan Hodge & Peter Schwallier, 2006. "How Does Separability Affect The Desirability Of Referendum Election Outcomes?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 251-276, November.
    3. W. M. Gorman, 1968. "The Structure of Utility Functions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(4), pages 367-390.
    4. Bradley, W. James & Hodge, Jonathan K. & Kilgour, D. Marc, 2005. "Separable discrete preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 335-353, May.
    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. Clark Bowman & Jonathan Hodge & Ada Yu, 2014. "The potential of iterative voting to solve the separability problem in referendum elections," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 111-124, June.
    2. Lang, Jrme & Xia, Lirong, 2009. "Sequential composition of voting rules in multi-issue domains," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 304-324, May.

    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. , & ,, 2012. "Strategy-proof voting for multiple public goods," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    2. Tuğçe Çuhadaroğlu & Jean Lainé, 2012. "Pareto efficiency in multiple referendum," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 525-536, April.
    3. Lang, Jrme & Xia, Lirong, 2009. "Sequential composition of voting rules in multi-issue domains," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 304-324, May.
    4. Jonathan Hodge & Peter Schwallier, 2006. "How Does Separability Affect The Desirability Of Referendum Election Outcomes?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 251-276, November.
    5. Fatma Aslan & Hayrullah Dindar & Jean Lainé, 2022. "When are committees of Condorcet winners Condorcet winning committees?," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 26(3), pages 417-446, September.
    6. Bommier, Antoine & Lanz, Bruno & Zuber, Stéphane, 2015. "Models-as-usual for unusual risks? On the value of catastrophic climate change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-22.
    7. , B. & ,, 2014. "Escaping the repugnant conclusion: rank-discounted utilitarianism with variable population," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    8. Paolo Giovanni Piacquadio, 2017. "A Fairness Justification of Utilitarianism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1261-1276, July.
    9. Arnaud Costinot & Jonathan Vogel, 2010. "Matching and Inequality in the World Economy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 747-786, August.
    10. Thibault Gajdos & John Weymark, 2005. "Multidimensional generalized Gini indices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(3), pages 471-496, October.
    11. Benoit Decerf, 2021. "Combining absolute and relative poverty: income poverty measurement with two poverty lines," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 325-362, February.
    12. BLACKORBY, Charles & BOSSERT, Walter & DONALDSON, David, 2006. "Population Ethics," Cahiers de recherche 2006-15, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
      • BLACKORBY, Charles & BOSSERT, Walter & DONALDSON, David, 2006. "Population Ethics," Cahiers de recherche 14-2006, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    13. André Lapied & Olivier Renault, 2012. "A subjective discounted utility model," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(2), pages 1171-1179.
    14. Briec, Walter & Mussard, Stéphane, 2014. "Efficient firm groups: Allocative efficiency in cooperative games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(1), pages 286-296.
    15. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    16. Andrea Mantovi, 2016. "Smooth preferences, symmetries and expansion vector fields," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 119(2), pages 147-169, October.
    17. Antonin Macé, 2017. "Voting with evaluations: characterizations of evaluative voting and range voting," Working Papers halshs-01222200, HAL.
    18. M. Ali Khan & Metin Uyanık, 2021. "Topological connectedness and behavioral assumptions on preferences: a two-way relationship," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(2), pages 411-460, March.
    19. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.
    20. Martin Jensen, 2010. "Aggregative games and best-reply potentials," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 43(1), pages 45-66, April.

    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:55:y:2008:i:2:p:190-204. 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.