IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v106y2017icp1-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An impossibility under bounded response of social choice functions

Author

Listed:
  • Muto, Nozomu
  • Sato, Shin

Abstract

We introduce a new axiom called bounded response, which states that for each “smallest” change of a preference profile, the change in the social choice must be “smallest,” if any, for the agent who induces the change in the preference profile. We show that bounded response is weaker than strategy-proofness, and that bounded response and efficiency imply dictatorship. This impossibility has a far-reaching negative implication: on the universal domain of preferences, it is difficult to identify a non-manipulability condition that leads to a possibility result.

Suggested Citation

  • Muto, Nozomu & Sato, Shin, 2017. "An impossibility under bounded response of social choice functions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-15.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:1-15
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2017.08.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825617301471
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2017.08.013?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. Nozomu Muto & Shin Sato, 2016. "A decomposition of strategy-proofness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 277-294, August.
    2. Sato, Shin, 2013. "A sufficient condition for the equivalence of strategy-proofness and nonmanipulability by preferences adjacent to the sincere one," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 259-278.
    3. Cho, Wonki Jo, 2016. "Incentive properties for ordinal mechanisms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 168-177.
    4. Baigent, Nicholas, 2011. "Chapter Eighteen - Topological Theories of Social Choice," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 18, pages 301-334, Elsevier.
    5. Mishra, Debasis, 2016. "Ordinal Bayesian incentive compatibility in restricted domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 925-954.
    6. Ning Yu, 2015. "A quest for fundamental theorems of social choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(3), pages 533-548, March.
    7. Gabriel Carroll, 2012. "When Are Local Incentive Constraints Sufficient?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 661-686, March.
    8. Barbera, Salvador & Sonnenschein, Hugo & Zhou, Lin, 1991. "Voting by Committees," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 595-609, May.
    9. Muto, Nozomu & Sato, Shin, 2016. "Bounded response of aggregated preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-15.
    10. Nick Baigent, 1987. "Preference Proximity and Anonymous Social Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(1), pages 161-169.
    11. Alexander Reffgen, 2011. "Generalizing the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem: partial preferences, the degree of manipulation, and multi-valuedness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(1), pages 39-59, June.
    12. Shin Sato, 2010. "Circular domains," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 14(3), pages 331-342, September.
    13. Reny, Philip J., 2001. "Arrow's theorem and the Gibbard-Satterthwaite theorem: a unified approach," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 99-105, January.
    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. Erdamar, Bora & Sanver, M. Remzi & Sato, Shin, 2017. "Evaluationwise strategy-proofness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 227-238.
    2. Gori, Michele, 2021. "Manipulation of social choice functions under incomplete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 350-369.
    3. Ozkes, Ali I. & Sanver, M. Remzi, 2023. "Uniform random dictatorship: A characterization without strategy-proofness," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).

    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. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2018. "On random social choice functions with the tops-only property," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 413-435.
    2. Chatterji, Shurojit & Zeng, Huaxia, 2019. "Random mechanism design on multidimensional domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 25-105.
    3. Madhuparna Karmokar & Souvik Roy, 2023. "The structure of (local) ordinal Bayesian incentive compatible random rules," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(1), pages 111-152, July.
    4. Erdamar, Bora & Sanver, M. Remzi & Sato, Shin, 2017. "Evaluationwise strategy-proofness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 227-238.
    5. Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup, 2022. "On the equivalence of strategy-proofness and upper contour strategy-proofness for randomized social choice functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    6. Sato, Shin, 2013. "A sufficient condition for the equivalence of strategy-proofness and nonmanipulability by preferences adjacent to the sincere one," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 259-278.
    7. Nozomu Muto & Shin Sato, 2016. "A decomposition of strategy-proofness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 277-294, August.
    8. Kumar, Ujjwal & Roy, Souvik & Sen, Arunava & Yadav, Sonal & Zeng, Huaxia, 2021. "Local global equivalence for unanimous social choice functions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 299-308.
    9. Liu, Peng & Zeng, Huaxia, 2019. "Random assignments on preference domains with a tier structure," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 176-194.
    10. William Thomson, 2023. "Where should your daughter go to college? An axiomatic analysis," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 60(1), pages 313-330, January.
    11. Liu, Peng, 2020. "Local vs. global strategy-proofness: A new equivalence result for ordinal mechanisms," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    12. Chatterji, Shurojit & Sen, Arunava & Zeng, Huaxia, 2016. "A characterization of single-peaked preferences via random social choice functions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(2), May.
    13. Youngsub Chun & Kiyong Yun, 2020. "Upper-contour strategy-proofness in the probabilistic assignment problem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(4), pages 667-687, April.
    14. Miho Hong & Semin Kim, 2023. "Unanimity and local incentive compatibility in sparsely connected domains," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(2), pages 385-411, August.
    15. Muto, Nozomu & Sato, Shin, 2016. "Bounded response of aggregated preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-15.
    16. Roy, Souvik & Sadhukhan, Soumyarup, 2021. "A unified characterization of the randomized strategy-proof rules," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    17. Karmokar, Madhuparna & Roy, Souvik, 2020. "The structure of (local) ordinal Bayesian incentive compatible random rules," MPRA Paper 103494, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Harless, Patrick, 2016. "Solidarity in preference aggregation: Improving on a status quo," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 73-87.
    19. Altuntaş, Açelya & Phan, William & Tamura, Yuki, 2023. "Some characterizations of Generalized Top Trading Cycles," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 156-181.
    20. Sulagna Dasgupta & Debasis Mishra, 2020. "Ordinal Bayesian incentive compatibility in random assignment model," Papers 2009.13104, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bounded response; Strategy-proofness; Non-manipulability; Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D71 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Social Choice; Clubs; Committees; Associations

    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:eee:gamebe:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:1-15. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    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.