IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/aea/jecper/v9y1995i1p51-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Optimal Voting Rules

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Truchon, Michel, 2004. "Aggregation of Rankings in Figure Skating," Cahiers de recherche 0402, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
  2. Piketty, Thomas, 1999. "The information-aggregation approach to political institutions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 791-800, April.
  3. Ruth Ben-Yashar & Leif Danziger, 2015. "When is voting optimal?," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 341-356, October.
  4. Davide Grossi, 2021. "Lecture Notes on Voting Theory," Papers 2105.00216, arXiv.org.
  5. Geoffrey Brennan & Alan Hamlin, 1998. "Expressive voting and electoral equilibrium," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 149-175, April.
  6. Ben-Yashar, Ruth & Danziger, Leif, 2016. "The unanimity rule and extremely asymmetric committees," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 107-112.
  7. Stephen Gordon & Michel Truchon, 2008. "Social choice, optimal inference and figure skating," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(2), pages 265-284, February.
  8. Eliora Hout & Anthony McGann, 2009. "Liberal political equality implies proportional representation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(4), pages 617-627, November.
  9. Giuseppe Munda, 2012. "Choosing Aggregation Rules for Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 337-354, December.
  10. Charemza, Wojciech & Ladley, Daniel, 2016. "Central banks’ forecasts and their bias: Evidence, effects and explanation," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 804-817.
  11. Eric Kamwa, 2013. "The Kemeny rule and committees elections," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 33(1), pages 648-654.
  12. Franz Dietrich, 2014. "Scoring rules for judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(4), pages 873-911, April.
  13. Le Breton, Michel & Truchon, Michel, 1997. "A Borda measure for social choice functions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 249-272, October.
  14. Susumu Cato, 2014. "Independence of irrelevant alternatives revisited," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 511-527, April.
  15. Patrick Hummel, 2010. "Jury theorems with multiple alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 34(1), pages 65-103, January.
  16. Samaneh Zahedi & Amir Hedayati Aghmashhadi & Christine Fürst, 2021. "Optimal Politics of Conflict over Physical-Industrial Development Using a Technique of Cooperative Game Theory in Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
  17. Ashok K. Lahiri, 2016. "The vexed land issue: a triple jeopardy," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 43(3), pages 301-309, September.
  18. Eberlein, Marion & Walkowitz, Gari, 2008. "Positive and Negative Team Identity in a Promotion Game," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 13/2008, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
  19. Antonio Cabrales & Irma Clots-Figueras & Roberto Hernán-González & Praveen Kujal, 2020. "Institutions, Opportunism and Prosocial Behavior: Some Experimental Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 8323, CESifo.
  20. Conitzer, Vincent, 2012. "Should social network structure be taken into account in elections?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 100-102.
  21. Truchon, Michel, 1999. "La démocratie : oui, mais laquelle?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 75(1), pages 189-214, mars-juin.
  22. Ernesto Savaglio & Stefano Vannucci, 2022. "Strategy-proof aggregation rules in median semilattices with applications to preference aggregation," Papers 2208.12732, arXiv.org.
  23. Marcus Pivato, 2013. "Voting rules as statistical estimators," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(2), pages 581-630, February.
  24. Gersbach, Hans & Mamageishvili, Akaki & Tejada, Oriol, 2020. "Appointed Learning for the Common Good: Optimal Committee Size and Efficient Rewards," CEPR Discussion Papers 15311, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  25. J. A. García & Rosa Rodriguez-Sánchez & J. Fdez-Valdivia & F. Moya-Anegón, 2014. "A web application for aggregating conflicting reviewers’ preferences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 523-539, May.
  26. Yeawon Yoo & Adolfo R. Escobedo, 2021. "A New Binary Programming Formulation and Social Choice Property for Kemeny Rank Aggregation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 296-320, December.
  27. Jac C. Heckelman & Robi Ragan, 2021. "Symmetric Scoring Rules And A New Characterization Of The Borda Count," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(1), pages 287-299, January.
  28. Koen Decancq & Luc Van Ootegem & Elsy Verhofstadt, 2013. "What If We Voted on the Weights of a Multidimensional Well‐Being Index? An Illustration with Flemish Data," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 34, pages 315-332, September.
  29. Benjamin Hadjibeyli & Mark C. Wilson, 2019. "Distance rationalization of anonymous and homogeneous voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(3), pages 559-583, March.
  30. Ben-Yashar, Ruth & Khuller, Samir & Kraus, Sarit, 2001. "Optimal collective dichotomous choice under partial order constraints," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 349-364, May.
  31. Kube, Sebastian & Schaube, Sebastian & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Khachatryan, Elina, 2015. "Institution formation and cooperation with heterogeneous agents," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 248-268.
  32. Eyal Baharad & Jacob Goldberger & Moshe Koppel & Shmuel Nitzan, 2012. "Beyond Condorcet: optimal aggregation rules using voting records," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 113-130, January.
  33. Pivato, Marcus, 2017. "Epistemic democracy with correlated voters," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 51-69.
  34. Stergios Athanassoglou, 2015. "Multidimensional welfare rankings under weight imprecision: a social choice perspective," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(4), pages 719-744, April.
  35. Fujun Hou, 2024. "A new social welfare function with a number of desirable properties," Papers 2403.16373, arXiv.org.
  36. Kiatsupaibul, Seksan & J. Hayter, Anthony & Liu, Wei, 2017. "Rank constrained distribution and moment computations," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 229-242.
  37. Jac C. Heckelman, 2021. "Characterizing plurality using the majoritarian condition: a new proof and implications for other scoring rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 335-346, December.
  38. Yves SPRUMONT, 2009. "Relative Egalitarianism and Related Criteria," Cahiers de recherche 02-2009, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
  39. Muto, Nozomu & Sato, Shin, 2016. "Bounded response of aggregated preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-15.
  40. Mohamed Drissi-Bakhkhat & Michel Truchon, 2004. "Maximum likelihood approach to vote aggregation with variable probabilities," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 23(2), pages 161-185, October.
  41. Amorós, Pablo, 2009. "Eliciting socially optimal rankings from unfair jurors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 1211-1226, May.
  42. Truchon, M., 1998. "Figure Skating and the Theory of Social Choice," Papers 9814, Laval - Recherche en Politique Economique.
  43. Gersbach, Hans & Siemers, Lars, 2005. "Can Democracy Educate a Society?," IZA Discussion Papers 1693, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  44. Dan Felsenthal & Nicolaus Tideman, 2014. "Weak Condorcet winner(s) revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 160(3), pages 313-326, September.
  45. Azzini, Ivano & Munda, Giuseppe, 2020. "A new approach for identifying the Kemeny median ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 388-401.
  46. Dan S. Felsenthal & Hannu Nurmi, 2016. "Two types of participation failure under nine voting methods in variable electorates," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 168(1), pages 115-135, July.
  47. Yuta Nakamura, 2015. "Maximum Likelihood Social Choice Rule," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 271-284, June.
  48. Ruth Ben-Yashar & Shmuel Nitzan, 2014. "On the significance of the prior of a correct decision in committees," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 317-327, March.
  49. Schmitz, Patrick W. & Tröger, Thomas, 2006. "Garbled Elections," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 195, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
  50. Ruth Ben‐Yashar & Miriam Krausz & Shmuel Nitzan, 2018. "Government loan guarantees and the credit decision‐making structure," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 51(2), pages 607-625, May.
  51. Sergei Gepshtein & Yurong Wang & Fangchao He & Dinh Diep & Thomas D. Albright, 2020. "A perceptual scaling approach to eyewitness identification," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
  52. Nehring, Klaus & Pivato, Marcus & Puppe, Clemens, 2011. "Condorcet admissibility: Indeterminacy and path-dependence under majority voting on interconnected decisions," MPRA Paper 32434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  53. Florian Brandl & Felix Brandt, 2020. "Arrovian Aggregation of Convex Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 799-844, March.
  54. Stefano Vannucci, 2022. "Agenda manipulation-proofness, stalemates, and redundant elicitation in preference aggregation. Exposing the bright side of Arrow's theorem," Papers 2210.03200, arXiv.org.
  55. Kaveh Madani & Majid Sheikhmohammady & Soroush Mokhtari & Mojtaba Moradi & Petros Xanthopoulos, 2014. "Social Planner’s Solution for the Caspian Sea Conflict," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 579-596, May.
  56. Athanassoglou, Stergios, 2013. "Multidimensional welfare rankings," MPRA Paper 51642, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  57. Christian Basteck, 2022. "Characterising scoring rules by their solution in iteratively undominated strategies," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 74(1), pages 161-208, July.
  58. Attardi, Raffaele & Cerreta, Maria & Sannicandro, Valentina & Torre, Carmelo Maria, 2018. "Non-compensatory composite indicators for the evaluation of urban planning policy: The Land-Use Policy Efficiency Index (LUPEI)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 491-507.
  59. Ali, Alnur & Meilă, Marina, 2012. "Experiments with Kemeny ranking: What works when?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 28-40.
  60. Shane Sanders & Joel Potter & Justin Ehrlich & Justin Perline & Christopher Boudreaux, 2021. "Informed voters and electoral outcomes: a natural experiment stemming from a fundamental information-technological shift," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(1), pages 257-277, October.
  61. Ruth Ben-Yashar & Leif Danziger, 2014. "On the optimal composition of committees," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 43(4), pages 973-980, December.
  62. Luigi Fabbris & Manuela Scioni, 2021. "Pooling Rankings to Obtain a Set of Scores for a Composite Indicator of Erasmus + Mobility Effects," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 156(2), pages 481-497, August.
  63. Florian Brandl & Dominik Peters, 2019. "An axiomatic characterization of the Borda mean rule," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(4), pages 685-707, April.
  64. Hummel, Patrick, 2011. "Information aggregation in multicandidate elections under plurality rule and runoff voting," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 1-6, July.
  65. Joseph McMurray, 2008. "Information and Voting: the Wisdom of the Experts versus the Wisdom of the Masses," Wallis Working Papers WP59, University of Rochester - Wallis Institute of Political Economy.
  66. Majid Sheikhmohammady & D. Marc Kilgour & Keith W. Hipel, 2010. "Modeling the Caspian Sea Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 149-168, March.
  67. Munda, Giuseppe, 2009. "A conflict analysis approach for illuminating distributional issues in sustainability policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 307-322, April.
  68. Graham, Brett & Bernhardt, Dan, 2015. "Flexibility vs. protection from an unrepresentative legislative majority," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 59-88.
  69. Daniele Checchi & Gianni De Fraja & Stefano Verzillo, 2018. "Selections from ordered sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(4), pages 677-703, April.
  70. Gersbach, Hans & Mamageishvili, Akaki & Tejada, Oriol, 2022. "Appointed learning for the common good: Optimal committee size and monetary transfers," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 153-176.
  71. Shin Sato, 2015. "Bounded response and the equivalence of nonmanipulability and independence of irrelevant alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 133-149, January.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.