IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v35y1980i4p483-491.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The comparative likelihood of an equivocal outcome under the plurality, Condorcet, and Borda voting procedures

Author

Listed:
  • Raphael Gillett

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Raphael Gillett, 1980. "The comparative likelihood of an equivocal outcome under the plurality, Condorcet, and Borda voting procedures," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 483-491, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:35:y:1980:i:4:p:483-491
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00128125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00128125
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00128125?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. DeMeyer, Frank & Plott, Charles R, 1970. "The Probability of a Cyclical Majority," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 38(2), pages 345-354, March.
    2. Gillett, Raphael, 1978. "A recursion relation for the probability of the paradox of voting," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 318-327, August.
    3. Gehrlein, William V. & Fishburn, Peter C., 1976. "The probability of the paradox of voting: A computable solution," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 14-25, August.
    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. Lirong Xia, 2020. "How Likely Are Large Elections Tied?," Papers 2011.03791, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2021.
    2. Niclas Boehmer & Robert Bredereck & Piotr Faliszewski & Rolf Niedermeier, 2022. "A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of the Robustness of (Real-World) Election Winners," Papers 2208.13760, arXiv.org.

    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. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/10286 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Hervé Crès, 2000. "Aggregation of Coarse Preferences," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-01064879, HAL.
    3. Harrison-Trainor, Matthew, 2022. "An analysis of random elections with large numbers of voters," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 68-84.
    4. Regenwetter, Michel & Marley, A. A. J. & Grofman, Bernard, 2002. "A general concept of majority rule," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 405-428, July.
    5. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2014. "Empirical social choice: an introduction," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 297-310, March.
    6. Hervé Crès, 2001. "Aggregation of coarse preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 18(3), pages 507-525.
    7. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/10286 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2001. "An Empirical Example of the Condorcet Paradox of Voting in a Large Electorate," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 107(1), pages 135-145, April.
    9. Balasko, Yves & Cres, Herve, 1997. "The Probability of Condorcet Cycles and Super Majority Rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 237-270, August.
    10. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10273 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Shmuel Nitzan, 1985. "The vulnerability of point-voting schemes to preference variation and strategic manipulation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 349-370, January.
    12. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/10286 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Yves Balasko & Hervé Crès, 1997. "The Probability of Condorcet Cycles and Super-Majority Rules," Post-Print hal-03458336, HAL.
    14. Matthew Harrison-Trainor, 2020. "An Analysis of Random Elections with Large Numbers of Voters," Papers 2009.02979, arXiv.org.
    15. Adrian Deemen, 2014. "On the empirical relevance of Condorcet’s paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 311-330, March.
    16. Hervé Crès, 2000. "Aggregation of Coarse Preferences," SciencePo Working papers hal-01064879, HAL.
    17. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10286 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/10273 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Eloi Laurent & Jacques Le Cacheux, 2006. "Integrity and Efficiency in the EU: The Case against the European economic constitution," Working Papers hal-00972707, HAL.
    20. Regenwetter, Michel & Grofman, Bernard & Marley, A. A. J., 2002. "On the model dependence of majority preference relations reconstructed from ballot or survey data," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 451-466, July.
    21. William Gehrlein, 2002. "Condorcet's paradox and the likelihood of its occurrence: different perspectives on balanced preferences ," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 171-199, March.
    22. Eric Kamwa, 2019. "On the Likelihood of the Borda Effect: The Overall Probabilities for General Weighted Scoring Rules and Scoring Runoff Rules," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 519-541, June.
    23. Boniface Mbih & Issofa Moyouwou & Abdoul Aziz Ndiaye, 2009. "Parliamentary voting rules and strategic candidacy," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(2), pages 1371-1379.
    24. Boniface Mbih & Sébastien Courtin & Issofa Moyouwou, 2010. "Susceptibility to coalitional strategic sponsoring," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 133-151, July.
    25. Sebastien Courtin & Boniface Mbih & Issofa Moyouwou, 2009. "Susceptibility to coalitional strategic sponsoring The case of parliamentary agendas," Post-Print hal-00914855, HAL.
    26. Abdelhalim El Ouafdi & Dominique Lepelley & Hatem Smaoui, 2020. "Probabilities of electoral outcomes: from three-candidate to four-candidate elections," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 88(2), pages 205-229, March.

    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:kap:pubcho:v:35:y:1980:i:4:p:483-491. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.