IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/amerec/v41y1997i1p83-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Voting Cycles in Business Curriculum Reform, a Note

Author

Listed:
  • John H. Beck

Abstract

The theoretical potential for voting cycles is well known, but the empirical frequency of its occurrence is still a topic for research. This paper presents a case study of the occurrence of voting cycles in business school curriculum reform. Three separate decisions are analyzed: (1) addition of a service requirement, (2) additions to the business core, and (3) changes in the nature of majors/“concentrations.†A voting cycle was found in (2) but not (1) or (3). This result is consistent with theoretical analyses finding that cycles are more likely when there are more alternatives to be considered and when there is less similarity in individual preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • John H. Beck, 1997. "Voting Cycles in Business Curriculum Reform, a Note," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 41(1), pages 83-88, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:41:y:1997:i:1:p:83-88
    DOI: 10.1177/056943459704100109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/056943459704100109
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/056943459704100109?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Dobra & Gordon Tullock, 1981. "An approach to empirical measures of voting paradoxes," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 193-194, 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. Adrian Deemen, 2014. "On the empirical relevance of Condorcet’s paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 311-330, March.

    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. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2014. "Empirical social choice: an introduction," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 297-310, March.
    2. Mostapha Diss & Eric Kamwa, 2019. "Simulations in Models of Preference Aggregation," Working Papers hal-02424936, HAL.
    3. John Dobra, 1983. "An approach to empirical studies of voting paradoxes: An update and extension," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 241-250, January.
    4. Adrian Deemen, 2014. "On the empirical relevance of Condorcet’s paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 311-330, March.
    5. Michel Regenwetter & James Adams & Bernard Grofman, 2002. "On the (Sample) Condorcet Efficiency of Majority Rule: An alternative view of majority cycles and social homogeneity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 153-186, September.

    More about this item

    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:sae:amerec:v:41:y:1997:i:1:p:83-88. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/aex .

    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.