IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/sochwe/v54y2020i1d10.1007_s00355-019-01212-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Single-crossing choice correspondences

Author

Listed:
  • Matheus Costa

    (University of Brasília)

  • Paulo Henrique Ramos

    (University of Chicago)

  • Gil Riella

    (FGV EPPG Escola de Políticas Públicas e Governo
    Getulio Vargas Foundation)

Abstract

We characterize choice correspondences that can be justified by a collection of preferences that satisfy the single-crossing and/or single-peak properties. These are properties vastly used in the applied literature, often in the context of parametric families of objective (utility) functions that satisfy them. Apesteguia et al. (Econometrica 85(2):661–674, 2017) characterize random utility models that satisfy those properties, and we provide similar results in the context of choice correspondences that admit a pseudo-rational or justifiable choice representation. These results might be useful for researchers in situations where it is not possible to work with random utility models or parametric families of objective (utility) functions. In addition, we use them to discuss some aspects of the connection between deterministic and stochastic choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Matheus Costa & Paulo Henrique Ramos & Gil Riella, 2020. "Single-crossing choice correspondences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(1), pages 69-86, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:54:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s00355-019-01212-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s00355-019-01212-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00355-019-01212-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00355-019-01212-7?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. Gans, Joshua S. & Smart, Michael, 1996. "Majority voting with single-crossing preferences," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 219-237, February.
    2. Alejandro Saporiti & Fernando Tohmé, 2006. "Single-Crossing, Strategic Voting and the Median Choice Rule," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(2), pages 363-383, April.
    3. Heller, Yuval, 2012. "Justifiable choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 375-390.
    4. Martin, Mathieu & Merlin, Vincent, 2002. "The stability set as a social choice correspondence," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 91-113, September.
    5. Robert Bredereck & Jiehua Chen & Gerhard Woeginger, 2013. "A characterization of the single-crossing domain," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(4), pages 989-998, October.
    6. Milgrom, Paul & Shannon, Chris, 1994. "Monotone Comparative Statics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 157-180, January.
    7. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel A. Ballester & Jay Lu, 2017. "Single‐Crossing Random Utility Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 661-674, March.
    8. De Donder, Philippe, 2013. "Majority voting and the single-crossing property when voters belong to separate groups," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(3), pages 523-525.
    9. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, 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. Furtado, Bruno A. & Nascimento, Leandro & Riella, Gil, 2023. "Rational choice with full-comparability domains," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 124-135.

    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. Barberà, Salvador & Moreno, Bernardo, 2011. "Top monotonicity: A common root for single peakedness, single crossing and the median voter result," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 345-359.
    2. Slinko, Arkadii & Wu, Qinggong & Wu, Xingye, 2021. "A characterization of preference domains that are single-crossing and maximal Condorcet," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    3. Fan-Chin Kung, 2015. "Sorting out single-crossing preferences on networks," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 663-672, March.
    4. ,, 2009. "Strategy-proofness and single-crossing," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 4(2), June.
    5. Cressman, Ross & Gallego, Maria, 2009. "On the ranking of bilateral bargaining opponents," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 64-83, July.
    6. Philippe De Donder & Marie-Louise Leroux, 2015. "The Political Economy of (in)formal Long Term Care Transfers," Cahiers de recherche 1508, Chaire de recherche Industrielle Alliance sur les enjeux économiques des changements démographiques.
    7. Islam, Jamal & Mohajan, Haradhan & Moolio, Pahlaj, 2010. "Methods of voting system and manipulation of voting," MPRA Paper 50854, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 06 May 2010.
    8. Salvador Barberà & Dolors Berga & Bernardo Moreno, 2020. "Arrow on domain conditions: a fruitful road to travel," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 237-258, March.
    9. Nikitas Konstantinidis, 2020. "Military conscription, external security, and income inequality: The missing link," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(2), pages 312-347, April.
    10. Camargo, Braz & Stein, Guilherme, 2022. "Credit constraints and human capital policies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    11. Philippe Donder & Marie-Louise Leroux, 2017. "The political choice of social long term care transfers when family gives time and money," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 49(3), pages 755-786, December.
    12. Sanjit Dhami & Ali Al‐Nowaihi, 2010. "Existence of a Condorcet Winner When Voters Have Other‐Regarding Preferences," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 12(5), pages 897-922, October.
    13. Dotti, Valerio, 2019. "Political Parties and Policy Outcomes. Do Parties Block Reforms?," MPRA Paper 100227, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Navin Kartik & SangMok Lee & Daniel Rappoport, 2022. "Single-Crossing Differences in Convex Environments," Papers 2212.12009, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    15. Jeremy T. Fox, 2018. "Estimating matching games with transfers," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 1-38, March.
    16. Fan-chin Kung, 2005. "Formation of Collective Decision-Making Units: Stability and a Solution," Game Theory and Information 0505002, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 21 Jun 2005.
    17. Puppe, Clemens & Slinko, Arkadii, 2024. "Maximal Condorcet domains. A further progress report," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 426-450.
    18. Volker Nocke & Nicolas Schutz, 2018. "Multiproduct‐Firm Oligopoly: An Aggregative Games Approach," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(2), pages 523-557, March.
    19. Valerio Dotti, 2021. "Reaching across the aisle to block reforms," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 72(2), pages 533-578, September.
    20. Muhammad Mahajne & Oscar Volij, 2019. "Condorcet winners and social acceptability," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(4), pages 641-653, December.

    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:spr:sochwe:v:54:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s00355-019-01212-7. 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.