The Unexpected Behavior of Plurality Rule

Theory and Decision 67 (3):267-293 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

When voters’ preferences on candidates are mutually coherent, in the sense that they are at all close to being perfectly single-peaked, perfectly single-troughed, or perfectly polarized, there is a large probability that a Condorcet Winner exists in elections with a small number of candidates. Given this fact, the study develops representations for Condorcet Efficiency of plurality rule as a function of the proximity of voters’ preferences on candidates to being perfectly single-peaked, perfectly single-troughed or perfectly polarized. We find that the widely used plurality rule has Condorcet Efficiency values that behave in very different ways under each of these three models of mutual coherence

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,247

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Sincerity and manipulation under approval voting.Ulle Endriss - 2013 - Theory and Decision 74 (3):335-355.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-01

Downloads
44 (#505,587)

6 months
5 (#1,039,842)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Aggregating out of indeterminacy.Brian Kogelmann - 2017 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 16 (2):210-232.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Social Choice and Individual Values.Irving M. Copi - 1952 - Science and Society 16 (2):181-181.
Social Choice and Individual Values.Kenneth Joseph Arrow - 1951 - New York, NY, USA: Wiley: New York.
The Theory of Committees and Elections.Duncan Black - 1961 - Philosophy 36 (137):248-249.
Condorcet's paradox.William V. Gehrlein - 1983 - Theory and Decision 15 (2):161-197.

Add more references