IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v19y2007i3p329-360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deliberation as Self-Discovery and Institutions for Political Speech

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Hafer

    (New York University)

  • Dimitri Landa

    (New York University, dimitri.landa@nyu.edu)

Abstract

We present a game-theoretic model of the social dynamics of belief change in which the (relevant) logically non-omniscient audience becomes convinced that the speakers' messages are `true' because its own prior beliefs logically entail them, rather than — as in cheap-talk models — because the speaker is (endogenously) trustworthy. We characterize the equilibria of the game and consider how their aggregate informational properties change with the variation in the institutions determining the ability of the speakers to reach their audience. We find that for plausible restrictions on the distribution of arguments and on the corresponding policy preferences in society, the informationally optimal institutions are first-best implementable, inegalitarian with respect to the resource allocation across speakers, and assign priority to the (more) extreme argument- and policy-holders.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Hafer & Dimitri Landa, 2007. "Deliberation as Self-Discovery and Institutions for Political Speech," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 19(3), pages 329-360, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:19:y:2007:i:3:p:329-360
    DOI: 10.1177/0951629807077573
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951629807077573
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951629807077573?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aragones, Enriqueta & Gilboa, Itzhak & Postlewaite, Andrew & Schmeidler, David, 2014. "Rhetoric and analogies," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 1-10.
    2. David P. Baron, 2003. "Private Politics," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 31-66, March.
    3. Matthew Rabin, 1998. "Psychology and Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 11-46, March.
    4. David Austen-Smith & Tim Feddersen, 2002. "Deliberation and Voting Rules," Discussion Papers 1359, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    5. John Geanakoplos, 1989. "Game Theory Without Partitions, and Applications to Speculation and Consensus," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 914, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    6. Crawford, Vincent P & Sobel, Joel, 1982. "Strategic Information Transmission," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(6), pages 1431-1451, November.
    7. Matthew Rabin & Joel L. Schrag, 1999. "First Impressions Matter: A Model of Confirmatory Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(1), pages 37-82.
    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. Rajiv Sethi & Muhamet Yildiz, 2012. "Public Disagreement," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(3), pages 57-95, August.
    2. Perote-Peña, Juan & Piggins, Ashley, 2015. "A Model Of Deliberative And Aggregative Democracy," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 93-121, March.
    3. Prato, Carlo & Wolton, Stephane, 2014. "Electoral Imbalances and their Consequences," MPRA Paper 68650, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 26 Nov 2015.
    4. Lupia, Arthur & Levine, Adam Seth & Zharinova, Natasha, 2010. "When Should Political Scientists Use the Self-Confirming Equilibrium Concept? Benefits, Costs, and an Application to Jury Theorems," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 103-123, January.
    5. Mark T. Le Quement & Isabel Marcin, 2016. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2016_05, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised Oct 2016.
    6. Ronald J. Gilson & Alan Schwartz, 2013. "Constraints on Private Benefits of Control: Ex Ante Control Mechanisms versus Ex Post Transaction Review," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 169(1), pages 160-183, March.

    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. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    2. Larry G. Epstein, 2006. "An Axiomatic Model of Non-Bayesian Updating," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(2), pages 413-436.
    3. Lybbert, Travis J. & Barrett, Christopher B. & McPeak, John G. & Luseno, Winnie K., 2007. "Bayesian Herders: Updating of Rainfall Beliefs in Response to External Forecasts," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 480-497, March.
    4. Aleix Calveras & Juan‐José Ganuza, 2016. "The Role of Public Information in Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(4), pages 990-1017, December.
    5. Carlos Sáenz-Royo, 2017. "A plausible Decision Heuristics Model: Fallibility of human judgment as an endogenous problem," Working Papers 2017/04, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    6. Danz, David, 2020. "Never underestimate your opponent: Hindsight bias causes overplacement and overentry into competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 588-603.
    7. Reuben E., 2002. "Interest groups and politics: The need to concentrate on group formation," Public Economics 0212001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. David Hirshleifer, 2001. "Investor Psychology and Asset Pricing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1533-1597, August.
    9. Daniel J. Benjamin, 2018. "Errors in Probabilistic Reasoning and Judgment Biases," NBER Working Papers 25200, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Dickinson, David L. & Oxoby, Robert J., 2011. "Cognitive dissonance, pessimism, and behavioral spillover effects," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 295-306, June.
    11. Frédéric KOESSLER, 2002. "Strategic Knowledge Sharing in Bayesian Games: A General Model," Working Papers of BETA 2002-01, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    12. Rabin, Matthew, 2000. "Inference by Believers in the Law of Small Numbers," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4sw8n41t, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    13. Isaac Loh & Gregory Phelan, 2019. "Dimensionality And Disagreement: Asymptotic Belief Divergence In Response To Common Information," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 60(4), pages 1861-1876, November.
    14. Axel Anderson & Nikoloz Pkhakadze, 2023. "Polarizing Persuasion," Working Papers gueconwpa~23-23-04, Georgetown University, Department of Economics.
    15. Erixon, Lennart, 2001. "Transformation Pressure and Growth - a Missing Link in Macroeconomics," Research Papers in Economics 2001:3, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
    16. Oxoby, Robert J., 2007. "The Effect of Incentive Structure on Heuristic Decision Making: The Proportion Heuristic," IZA Discussion Papers 2857, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Doss, Cheryl & McPeak, John & Barrett, Christopher B., 2008. "Interpersonal, Intertemporal and Spatial Variation in Risk Perceptions: Evidence from East Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1453-1468, August.
    18. Bogaçhan Çelen & Sen Geng & Huihui Li, 2018. "Belief Error and Non-Bayesian Social Learning: An Experimental Evidence," GRU Working Paper Series GRU_2018_022, City University of Hong Kong, Department of Economics and Finance, Global Research Unit.
    19. Nisvan Erkal & Lata Gangadharan & Boon Han Koh, 2018. "By chance or by choice? Biased attribution of others’ outcomes," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 2040, The University of Melbourne.
    20. Markus M. Möbius & Muriel Niederle & Paul Niehaus & Tanya S. Rosenblat, 2022. "Managing Self-Confidence: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 7793-7817, November.

    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:sae:jothpo:v:19:y:2007:i:3:p:329-360. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.