Strategic manipulability without resoluteness or shared beliefs: Gibbard-Satterthwaite generalized
AbstractThe Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem on the manipulability of social-choice rules assumes resoluteness: there are no ties, no multi-member choice sets. Generalizations based on a familiar lottery idea allow ties but assume perfectly shared probabilistic beliefs about their resolution. We prove a more straightforward generalization that assumes almost no limit on ties or beliefs about them.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Springer in its journal Social Choice and Welfare.
Volume (Year): 17 (2000)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Note: Received: 15 December 1997/Accepted: 16 November 1998
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00355/index.htm
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Thomas Schwartz, 2011. "Social choice and individual values in the electronic republic," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 621-632, October.
- Shurojit Chatterji & Arunava Sen, 2009.
Macroeconomics Working Papers
22064, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
- Marc Vorsatz, 2007.
"Approval Voting on Dichotomous Preferences,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 127-141, January.
- Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001.
"Ranking Sets of Objects,"
Cahiers de recherche
2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
- Burak Can & Bora Erdamar & M. Sanver, 2009. "Expected Utility Consistent Extensions of Preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 123-144, August.
- repec:ner:maastr:urn:nbn:nl:ui:27-15283 is not listed on IDEAS
- Roberto Serrano, 2003.
"The Theory of Implementation of Social Choice Rules,"
Economics Working Papers
0033, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
- Roberto Serrano, 2003. "The Theory of Implementation of Social Choice Rules," Working Papers 2003-19, Brown University, Department of Economics.
- Yasuhito Tanaka, 2001. "Generalized monotonicity and strategy-proofness for non-resolute social choice correspondences," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(12), pages 1-8.
- Weber, Tjark, 2009. "Alternatives vs. Outcomes: A Note on the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem," MPRA Paper 17836, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Fuad Aleskerov & Daniel Karabekyan & M. Sanver & Vyacheslav Yakuba, 2011. "An individual manipulability of positional voting rules," SERIEs, Spanish Economic Association, vol. 2(4), pages 431-446, December.
- Alexander Reffgen, 2011. "Generalizing the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem: partial preferences, the degree of manipulation, and multi-valuedness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 39-59, June.
- Bora Erdamar & M. Sanver, 2009. "Choosers as extension axioms," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 67(4), pages 375-384, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.