IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/series/v2y2011i4p515-527.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Gibbard random dictatorship theorem: a generalization and a new proof

Author

Listed:
  • Arunava Sen

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Arunava Sen, 2011. "The Gibbard random dictatorship theorem: a generalization and a new proof," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 515-527, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:series:v:2:y:2011:i:4:p:515-527
    DOI: 10.1007/s13209-011-0041-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13209-011-0041-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13209-011-0041-z?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. Salvador Barbera, 1979. "Majority and Positional Voting in a Probabilistic Framework," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 46(2), pages 379-389.
    2. Duggan, John, 1996. "A Geometric Proof of Gibbard's Random Dictatorship Theorem," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(2), pages 365-369, February.
    3. Barbera, Salvador, 1977. "The Manipulation of Social Choice Mechanisms That Do Not Leave "Too Much" to Chance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(7), pages 1573-1588, October.
    4. Gibbard, Allan, 1977. "Manipulation of Schemes That Mix Voting with Chance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(3), pages 665-681, April.
    5. Satterthwaite, Mark Allen, 1975. "Strategy-proofness and Arrow's conditions: Existence and correspondence theorems for voting procedures and social welfare functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 187-217, April.
    6. Ehlers, Lars & Peters, Hans & Storcken, Ton, 2002. "Strategy-Proof Probabilistic Decision Schemes for One-Dimensional Single-Peaked Preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 408-434, August.
    7. Sen, Arunava, 2001. "Another direct proof of the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 381-385, March.
    8. Gibbard, Allan, 1973. "Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A General Result," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 587-601, July.
    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. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2018. "On random social choice functions with the tops-only property," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 413-435.
    2. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sen, Arunava & Zeng, Huaxia, 2016. "A characterization of single-peaked preferences via random social choice functions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    3. Felix Brandt & Patrick Lederer & René Romen, 2024. "Relaxed notions of Condorcet-consistency and efficiency for strategyproof social decision schemes," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(1), pages 19-55, August.
    4. Anna bogomolnaia Ron Holzman Herve Moulin, 2021. "Wost Case in Voting and Bargaining," Papers 2104.02316, arXiv.org.
    5. Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup, 2021. "A unified characterization of the randomized strategy-proof rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    6. Souvik Roy & Soumyarup Sadhukhan, 2019. "A characterization of random min–max domains and its applications," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(4), pages 887-906, November.
    7. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sen, Arunava & Zeng, Huaxia, 2014. "Random dictatorship domains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 212-236.
    8. Peters, Hans & Roy, Souvik & Sen, Arunava & Storcken, Ton, 2014. "Probabilistic strategy-proof rules over single-peaked domains," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 123-127.
    9. Chatterji, Shurojit & Roy, Souvik & Sen, Arunava, 2012. "The structure of strategy-proof random social choice functions over product domains and lexicographically separable preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 353-366.
    10. Picot, Jérémy & Sen, Arunava, 2012. "An extreme point characterization of random strategy-proof social choice functions: The two alternative case," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 49-52.
    11. Peters, Hans & Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup & Storcken, Ton, 2017. "An extreme point characterization of strategy-proof and unanimous probabilistic rules over binary restricted domains," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 84-90.
    12. Anna Bogomolnaia & Ron Holzman & Hervé Moulin, 2021. "Worst Case in Voting and Bargaining," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-03196999, HAL.
    13. Bogomolnaia, Anna & Holzman, Ron & Moulin, Hervé, 2023. "On guarantees, vetoes and random dictators," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(1), January.
    14. Felix Brandt & Patrick Lederer & Ren'e Romen, 2022. "Relaxed Notions of Condorcet-Consistency and Efficiency for Strategyproof Social Decision Schemes," Papers 2201.10418, arXiv.org.
    15. Peters, Hans & Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup, 2018. "Random social choice functions for single-peaked domains on trees," Research Memorandum 004, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    16. Brandt, Felix & Lederer, Patrick & Suksompong, Warut, 2023. "Incentives in social decision schemes with pairwise comparison preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 266-291.
    17. Karmokar, Madhuparna & Majumdar, Dipjyoti & Roy, Souvik, 2024. "Some further results on random OBIC rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 102-112.

    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. Felix Brandt & Patrick Lederer & René Romen, 2024. "Relaxed notions of Condorcet-consistency and efficiency for strategyproof social decision schemes," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(1), pages 19-55, August.
    2. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2018. "On random social choice functions with the tops-only property," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 413-435.
    3. Aziz, Haris & Brandl, Florian & Brandt, Felix & Brill, Markus, 2018. "On the tradeoff between efficiency and strategyproofness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 1-18.
    4. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sen, Arunava & Zeng, Huaxia, 2014. "Random dictatorship domains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 212-236.
    5. Felix Brandt & Patrick Lederer & Ren'e Romen, 2022. "Relaxed Notions of Condorcet-Consistency and Efficiency for Strategyproof Social Decision Schemes," Papers 2201.10418, arXiv.org.
    6. Barbera, Salvador & Dutta, Bhaskar & Sen, Arunava, 2005. "Corrigendum to "Strategy-proof social choice correspondences" [J. Econ. Theory 101 (2001) 374-394]," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 275-275, February.
    7. Brandt, Felix & Lederer, Patrick & Suksompong, Warut, 2023. "Incentives in social decision schemes with pairwise comparison preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 266-291.
    8. Yasunori Okumura, 2021. "Rank-dominant strategy and sincere voting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 117-145, February.
    9. Souvik Roy & Soumyarup Sadhukhan, 2019. "A characterization of random min–max domains and its applications," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(4), pages 887-906, November.
    10. Bhaskar Dutta & Hans Peters & Arunava Sen, 2008. "Strategy-proof cardinal decision schemes," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(4), pages 701-702, May.
    11. Alexander Reffgen, 2011. "Generalizing the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem: partial preferences, the degree of manipulation, and multi-valuedness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(1), pages 39-59, June.
    12. Egor Ianovski & Mark C. Wilson, 2019. "Manipulability of consular election rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(2), pages 363-393, February.
    13. Pycia, Marek & Ünver, M. Utku, 2015. "Decomposing random mechanisms," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 21-33.
    14. Wolitzky, Alexander, 2009. "Fully sincere voting," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 720-735, November.
    15. Chatterji, Shurojit & Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup & Sen, Arunava & Zeng, Huaxia, 2022. "Probabilistic fixed ballot rules and hybrid domains," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    16. Bochet, Olivier & Sakai, Toyotaka, 2007. "Strategic manipulations of multi-valued solutions in economies with indivisibilities," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 53-68, January.
    17. Gogulapati Sreedurga & Soumyarup Sadhukhan & Souvik Roy & Yadati Narahari, 2022. "Characterization of Group-Fair Social Choice Rules under Single-Peaked Preferences," Papers 2207.07984, arXiv.org.
    18. Núñez, Matías & Pivato, Marcus, 2019. "Truth-revealing voting rules for large populations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 285-305.
    19. Felix Brandt, 2015. "Set-monotonicity implies Kelly-strategyproofness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 793-804, December.
    20. Lê Nguyên Hoang, 2017. "Strategy-proofness of the randomized Condorcet voting system," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(3), pages 679-701, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Gibbard’s random dictatorship theorem; Free Triple at the Top; Limited comparison strategy-proofness; D71;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    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:spr:series:v:2:y:2011:i:4:p:515-527. 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.