IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/ecm/emetrp/v41y1973i5p987-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Nathan Huntley & Matthias Troffaes, 2012. "Normal form backward induction for decision trees with coherent lower previsions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 111-134, May.
  2. 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.
  3. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2020. "Axioms for Defeat in Democratic Elections," Papers 2008.08451, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
  4. Anderson, Edward & Zachary, Stan, 2023. "Minimax decision rules for planning under uncertainty: Drawbacks and remedies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(2), pages 789-800.
  5. McLean, Iain, 1995. "Independence of irrelevant alternatives before Arrow," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 107-126, October.
  6. Katarzyna Jurewicz & Brianna J. Sleezer & Priyanka S. Mehta & Benjamin Y. Hayden & R. Becket Ebitz, 2024. "Irrational choices via a curvilinear representational geometry for value," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
  7. Nicholas R. Miller, 2019. "Reflections on Arrow’s theorem and voting rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 113-124, April.
  8. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2021. "Axioms for defeat in democratic elections," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(4), pages 475-524, October.
  9. Rausser, Gordon C. & Simon, Leo K. & van 't Veld, Klaas T., 1994. "Political-economic processes and collective decision making," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt2s43m3nc, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
  10. Cerreia-Vioglio, Simone & Lindberg, Per Olov & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo & Rustichini, Aldo, 2021. "A canon of probabilistic rationality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
  11. Fok, D. & Paap, R., 2019. "New Misspecification Tests for Multinomial Logit Models," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI2019-24, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
  12. Jac C. Heckelman, 2015. "Properties and paradoxes of common voting rules," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 15, pages 263-283, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  13. Salvatore Barbaro & Nils D. Steiner, 2022. "Majority principle and indeterminacy in German elections," Working Papers 2202, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
  14. Hanning Li & Hongyun Han & Shiyu Ying, 2022. "Reputation Effect on Contract Choice and Self-Enforcement: A Case Study of Farmland Transfer in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-23, August.
  15. Zoi Terzopoulou & Ulle Endriss, 2019. "Strategyproof judgment aggregation under partial information," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(3), pages 415-442, October.
  16. Renato Soeiro & Alberto A. Pinto, 2022. "A Note on Type-Symmetries in Finite Games," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(24), pages 1-13, December.
  17. Krzysztof Kluza & Magdalena Zioło & Iwona Bąk & Anna Spoz, 2021. "Achieving Environmental Policy Objectives through the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals. The Case for European Union Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, April.
  18. Susumu Cato, 2014. "Independence of irrelevant alternatives revisited," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(4), pages 511-527, April.
  19. Grzegorz Pierczy'nski & Stanis{l}aw Szufa, 2024. "Single-Winner Voting with Alliances: Avoiding the Spoiler Effect," Papers 2401.16399, arXiv.org.
  20. Marek M. Kaminski, 2018. "Spoiler effects in proportional representation systems: evidence from eight Polish parliamentary elections, 1991–2015," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 441-460, September.
  21. Jeffrey Helzner, 2009. "On the Application of Multiattribute Utility Theory to Models of Choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 301-315, April.
  22. Isabel Tiago de Oliveira & José G Dias & Sabu S Padmadas, 2014. "Dominance of Sterilization and Alternative Choices of Contraception in India: An Appraisal of the Socioeconomic Impact," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, January.
  23. 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.
  24. Edgardo Bucciarelli & Andrea Oliva, 2020. "Arrow’s impossibility theorem as a special case of Nash equilibrium: a cognitive approach to the theory of collective decision-making," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 19(1), pages 15-41, June.
  25. Hein, Maren & Goeken, Nils & Kurz, Peter & Steiner, Winfried J., 2022. "Using Hierarchical Bayes draws for improving shares of choice predictions in conjoint simulations: A study based on conjoint choice data," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 297(2), pages 630-651.
  26. Dougherty, Keith L. & Heckelman, Jac C., 2020. "The probability of violating Arrow’s conditions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
  27. John W. Patty & Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2019. "A defense of Arrow’s independence of irrelevant alternatives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 145-164, April.
  28. Giuseppe Munda, 2015. "Beyond Gdp: An Overview Of Measurement Issues In Redefining ‘Wealth’," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 403-422, July.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.