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.
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 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.
- 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.
- Thomas Schwartz, 2011. "Social choice and individual values in the electronic republic," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 621-632, October.
- Marc Vorsatz, 2004.
"Approval Voting ion Dichotomous Preferences,"
UFAE and IAE Working Papers
619.04, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
- Shurojit Chatterji & Arunava Sen, 2009.
Macroeconomics Working Papers
22064, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
- Yasuhito Tanaka, 2001. "Generalized monotonicity and strategy-proofness for non-resolute social choice correspondences," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(12), pages 1-8.
- 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.
- BARBERA, Salvador & BOSSERT, Walter & PATTANAIK, Prasanta K., 2001.
"Ranking Sets of Objects,"
Cahiers de recherche, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques
2001-02, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
- Barbera, S. & Bossert, W. & Pattanaik, P.K., 2001. "Ranking Sets of Objects," Cahiers de recherche, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en Ã©conomie quantitative, CIREQ 2001-02, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en Ã©conomie quantitative, CIREQ.
- Weber, Tjark, 2009. "Alternatives vs. Outcomes: A Note on the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Theorem," MPRA Paper 17836, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Burak Can & Bora Erdamar & M. Sanver, 2009. "Expected Utility Consistent Extensions of Preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 123-144, August.
- Alexander Reffgen, 2011. "Generalizing the Gibbard–Satterthwaite theorem: partial preferences, the degree of manipulation, and multi-valuedness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, 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 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.