Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The possibility of judgment aggregation on agendas with subjunctive implications

Contents:

Author Info

  • Dietrich, Franz

Abstract

The new field of judgment aggregation aims to find collective judgments on logically interconnected propositions. Recent impossibility results establish limitations on the possibility to vote independently on the propositions. I show that, fortunately, the impossibility results do not apply to a wide class of realistic agendas once propositions like "if a then b" are adequately modelled, namely as subjunctive implications rather than material implications. For these agendas, consistent and complete collective judgments can be reached through appropriate quota rules (which decide propositions using acceptance thresholds). I characterise the class of these quota rules. I also prove an abstract result that characterises consistent aggregation for arbitrary agendas in a general logic.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6WJ3-4SK632V-8/2/011536afbd20331b20cbf32cfaad0331
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Economic Theory.

Volume (Year): 145 (2010)
Issue (Month): 2 (March)
Pages: 603-638

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:145:y:2010:i:2:p:603-638

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622869

Related research

Keywords: Judgment aggregation Subjunctive implication Material implication Characterisation of possibility agendas;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Mongin, Philippe, 2008. "Factoring out the impossibility of logical aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 100-113, July.
  2. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2006. "Judgment aggregation on restricted domains," Research Memorandum 033, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  3. Christian List, 2002. "A Model of Path-Dependence in Decisions over Multiple Propositions," Economics Series Working Papers 2002-W15, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  4. Dietrich, Franz, 2006. "Judgment aggregation: (im)possibility theorems," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 286-298, January.
  5. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2005. "Strategy-proof judgment aggregation," STICERD - Political Economy and Public Policy Paper Series 09, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
  6. Martin Hees, 2007. "The limits of epistemic democracy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 649-666, June.
  7. Franz Dietrich, 2007. "A generalised model of judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 529-565, June.
  8. List, Christian & Pettit, Philip, 2002. "Aggregating Sets of Judgments: An Impossibility Result," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(01), pages 89-110, April.
  9. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2005. "Judgment aggregation by quota rules," Public Economics 0501005, EconWPA.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Mongin, Philippe, 2012. "The doctrinal paradox, the discursive dilemma, and logical aggregation theory," MPRA Paper 37752, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  2. Christian List & Ben Polak, 2010. "Introduction to Judgment Aggregation," Levine's Working Paper Archive 661465000000000006, David K. Levine.
  3. Dietrich, Franz & Mongin Philippe, 2008. "The Premiss-Based Approach to Judgment Aggregation," Research Memorandum 013, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  4. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2010. "Majority voting on restricted domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 512-543, March.
  5. Hervé Crès & Itzhak Gilboa, & Nicolas Vieille, 2012. "Bureaucracy in Quest for Feasibility," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7d, Sciences Po.
  6. Franz Dietrich, 2014. "Scoring rules for judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 873-911, April.
  7. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m2e02cub3 is not listed on IDEAS
  8. Dietrich, Franz, 2011. "Scoring rules for judgment aggregation," MPRA Paper 35657, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  9. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2010. "The impossibility of unbiased judgment aggregation," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 281-299, March.
  10. Nehring, Klaus & Puppe, Clemens, 2010. "Justifiable group choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 583-602, March.
  11. Christian List & Ben Polak, 2010. "Introduction to judgment aggregation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27900, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jetheo:v:145:y:2010:i:2:p:603-638. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.