IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/cup/bjposi/v34y2004i04p657-674_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Standard Voting Power Indexes Do Not Work: An Empirical Analysis

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Zineb Abidi & Matthieu Leprince & Vincent Merlin, 2020. "Power Inequality in Inter-communal Structures: The Simulated Impact of a Reform in the Case of the Municipalities in Western France," Post-Print halshs-02996998, HAL.
  2. Le Breton, Michel & Lepelley, Dominique & Macé, Antonin & Merlin, Vincent, 2017. "Le mécanisme optimal de vote au sein du conseil des représentants d’un système fédéral," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 93(1-2), pages 203-248, Mars-Juin.
  3. Matteo Migheli & Guido Ortona & Ferruccio Ponzano, 2014. "Competition among parties and power: an empirical analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 215(1), pages 201-214, April.
  4. Marcus Pivato, 2016. "Asymptotic utilitarianism in scoring rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 431-458, August.
  5. Laslier, Jean-François, 2012. "Why not proportional?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 90-93.
  6. Bernard Grofman & Scott Feld, 2005. "Thinking About the Political Impacts of the Electoral College," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 1-18, April.
  7. Fabrice Barthelemy & Mathieu Martin, 2011. "A Comparison Between the Methods of Apportionment Using Power Indices: the Case of the US Presidential Elections," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 101-102, pages 87-106.
  8. Pivato, Marcus, 2015. "Condorcet meets Bentham," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 58-65.
  9. Dan Usher, 2014. "An alternative explanation of the chance of casting a pivotal vote," Rationality and Society, , vol. 26(1), pages 105-138, February.
  10. Kóczy, L.Á., 2006. "Voting Paradoxes and the Human Intuition," Research Memorandum 048, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  11. Geller, Chris R. & Mustard, Jamie & Shahwan, Ranya, 2013. "Focused power: Experiments, the Shapley-Shubik power index, and focal points," Economics Discussion Papers 2013-42, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
  12. Ke, Changxia & Morath, Florian & Newell, Anthony & Page, Lionel, 2022. "Too big to prevail: The paradox of power in coalition formation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 394-410.
  13. Kurz, Sascha & Maaser, Nicola & Napel, Stefan, 2018. "Fair representation and a linear Shapley rule," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 152-161.
  14. Matteo Migheli, 2016. "Measuring Representativeness in Different Electoral Systems, Using Italian and Dutch Data," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 723-748, July.
  15. Naoki Watanabe, 2022. "Reconsidering Meaningful Learning in a Bandit Experiment on Weighted Voting: Subjects’ Search Behavior," The Review of Socionetwork Strategies, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 81-107, April.
  16. Algaba, E. & Bilbao, J.M. & Fernandez, J.R., 2007. "The distribution of power in the European Constitution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1752-1766, February.
  17. Yukio Koriyama & Jean-François Laslier & Antonin Macé & Rafael Treibich, 2013. "Optimal Apportionment," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(3), pages 584-608.
  18. Paul H. Edelman, 2016. "Evenwel, Voting Power, and Dual Districting," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 203-221.
  19. Grimmett, Geoffrey R., 2019. "On influence and compromise in two-tier voting systems," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 35-45.
  20. de Mouzon, Olivier & Laurent, Thibault & Le Breton, Michel & Moyouwou, Issofa, 2020. "“One Man, One Vote” Part 1: Electoral Justice in the U.S. Electoral College: Banzhaf and Shapley/Shubik versus May," TSE Working Papers 20-1074, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  21. Patrick Hummel, 2011. "Proportional versus winner-take-all electoral vote allocations," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 381-393, September.
  22. Ozgur Evren, 2009. "Altruism, Turnout and Strategic Voting Behavior," Levine's Working Paper Archive 814577000000000309, David K. Levine.
  23. Nicolas Houy, 2006. "La Constitution européenne est 50,13 %-stable. Une note comparative sur la stabilité des Constitutions," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(1), pages 123-134.
  24. Christine Fauvelle-Aymar & Abel François, 2006. "The impact of closeness on turnout: An empirical relation based on a study of a two-round ballot," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 461-483, June.
  25. László Á. Kóczy, 2009. "Measuring voting power: The paradox of new members vs the null player axiom," Working Paper Series 0903, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
  26. Changxia Ke & Florian Morath & Anthony Newell & Lionel Page, 2016. "Too big to prevail: Coalition formations in the presence of a superpower," QuBE Working Papers 044, QUT Business School.
  27. Aaron Edlin & Andrew Gelman & Noah Kaplan, 2007. "Voting as a Rational Choice," Rationality and Society, , vol. 19(3), pages 293-314, August.
  28. Nicholas Miller, 2012. "Why the Electoral College is good for political science (and public choice)," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 1-25, January.
  29. Jonathan R. Strand & Kenneth J. Retzl, 2016. "Did Recent Voice Reforms Improve Good Governance within the World Bank?," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 47(3), pages 415-445, May.
  30. Michel Breton & Karine Straeten, 2015. "Influence versus utility in the evaluation of voting rules: a new look at the Penrose formula," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 103-122, October.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.