IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/elg/eebook/15584.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Handbook of Social Choice and Voting

Editor

Listed:
  • Jac C. Heckelman
  • Nicholas R. Miller

Abstract

This Handbook provides an overview of interdisciplinary research related to social choice and voting that is intended for a broad audience. Expert contributors from various fields present critical summaries of the existing literature, including intuitive explanations of technical terminology and well-known theorems, suggesting new directions for research.

Individual chapters are listed in the "Chapters" tab

Suggested Citation

  • Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), 2015. "Handbook of Social Choice and Voting," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15584.
    • Handle: RePEc:elg:eebook:15584
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781783470723.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:wly:soecon:v:82:3:y:2016:p:781-800 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Florenz Plassmann & T. Tideman, 2014. "How frequently do different voting rules encounter voting paradoxes in three-candidate elections?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 31-75, January.
    3. Marc Feix & Dominique Lepelley & Vincent Merlin & Jean-Louis Rouet, 2004. "The probability of conflicts in a U.S. presidential type election," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 23(2), pages 227-257, January.
    4. Mackie,Gerry, 2003. "Democracy Defended," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521827089.
    5. William V. Gehrlein, 2006. "Condorcet’s Paradox," Theory and Decision Library C, Springer, number 978-3-540-33799-7, March.
    6. Brams, Steven J. & Fishburn, Peter C., 1978. "Approval Voting," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 72(3), pages 831-847, September.
    7. Joseph Ornstein & Robert Norman, 2014. "Frequency of monotonicity failure under Instant Runoff Voting: estimates based on a spatial model of elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 1-9, October.
    8. Mackie,Gerry, 2003. "Democracy Defended," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521534314.
    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. Kurrild-Klitgaard, Peter, 2018. "Trump, Condorcet and Borda: Voting paradoxes in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 29-35.
    2. Wesley H. Holliday & Eric Pacuit, 2020. "Axioms for Defeat in Democratic Elections," Papers 2008.08451, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    3. Maciel, Marcelo V. & Martins, André C.R., 2020. "Ideologically motivated biases in a multiple issues opinion model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 553(C).
    4. Anindya Bhattacharya & Victoria Brosi & Francesco Ciardiello, 2018. "The uncovered set and the core: Cox's (1987) result revisited," Discussion Papers 18/13, Department of Economics, University of York.
    5. Mathieu Martin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Craig A. Tovey, 2019. "Dominance in Spatial Voting with Imprecise Ideals: A New Characterization of the Yolk," THEMA Working Papers 2019-02, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    6. Jac C. Heckelman, 2021. "Characterizing plurality using the majoritarian condition: a new proof and implications for other scoring rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 189(3), pages 335-346, December.
    7. Maurice Salles, 2017. "Felix Brandt, Vincent Conitzer, Ulle Endriss, Jerôme Lang, and Ariel Procaccia (eds), Handbook of Computational Social Choice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 535 pages, ISBN 978-110744698-4," Post-Print halshs-02084709, HAL.
    8. Heckelman, Jac C. & Wilson, Bonnie, 2019. "The growth-maximizing level of regulation: Evidence from a panel of international data," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 354-368.
    9. Marek M. Kaminski, 2018. "Spoiler effects in proportional representation systems: evidence from eight Polish parliamentary elections, 1991–2015," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 441-460, September.
    10. Bryan C. McCannon & Paul Walker, 2016. "Endogenous competence and a limit to the Condorcet Jury Theorem," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-18, October.
    11. Eiselt, H.A. & Marianov, Vladimir, 2020. "Maximizing political vote in multiple districts," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    12. Mehdi Feizi & Rasoul Ramezanian & Saeed Malek Sadati, 2020. "Borda paradox in the 2017 Iranian presidential election: empirical evidence from opinion polls," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 101-113, June.
    13. Nicholas R. Miller, 2019. "Reflections on Arrow’s theorem and voting rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 113-124, April.
    14. Jacob Bower-Bir & William Bianco & Nicholas D’Amico & Christopher Kam & Itai Sened & Regina Smyth, 2015. "Predicting majority rule: Evaluating the uncovered set and the strong point," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 27(4), pages 650-672, October.
    15. Mathieu Martin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Craig A. Tovey, 2021. "Dominance in spatial voting with imprecise ideals," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(1), pages 181-195, July.
    16. Felix Brandt & Markus Brill & Hans Georg Seedig & Warut Suksompong, 2020. "On the Structure of Stable Tournament Solutions," Papers 2004.01651, arXiv.org.
    17. Sanjit Dhami & Ali al-Nowaihi, 2016. "Social responsibility, human morality and public policy," Discussion Papers in Economics 16/20, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    18. Dougherty, Keith L. & Heckelman, Jac C., 2020. "The probability of violating Arrow’s conditions," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    19. Gyung-Ho Jeong, 2017. "The supermajority core of the US Senate and the failure to join the League of Nations," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 325-343, December.
    20. Anindya Bhattacharya & Victoria Brosi & Francesco Ciardiello, 2018. "The Uncovered Set and the Core: Cox's Result Revisited," The Journal of Mechanism and Institution Design, Society for the Promotion of Mechanism and Institution Design, University of York, vol. 3(1), pages 1-15, December.
    21. Felix Brandt & Markus Brill & Hans Georg Seedig & Warut Suksompong, 2018. "On the structure of stable tournament solutions," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(2), pages 483-507, March.
    22. Jarosław Flis & Marek M. Kaminski, 2022. "Party-related primacy effects in proportional representation systems: evidence from a natural experiment in Polish local elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 190(3), pages 345-363, March.
    23. Mathieu Martin & Zéphirin Nganmeni & Craig A. Tovey, 2016. "On the uniqueness of the yolk," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(3), pages 511-518, October.
    24. Naruto Nagaoka, 2019. "Monotonicity in Condorcet Jury Theorem under Strategic Voting," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(4), pages 2688-2696.

    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. Marek M. Kaminski, 2015. "Empirical examples of voting paradoxes," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 20, pages 367-387, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2014. "Empirical social choice: an introduction," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 297-310, March.
    3. Kurrild-Klitgaard, Peter, 2018. "Trump, Condorcet and Borda: Voting paradoxes in the 2016 Republican presidential primaries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 29-35.
    4. Iain McLean, 2015. "The strange history of social choice, and the contribution of the Public Choice Society to its fifth revival," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 153-165, April.
    5. Mogens Pedersen, 2014. "A Danish killer amendment—when judicial review was banned from the 1849 Constitution," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 513-523, March.
    6. John W. Patty & Elizabeth Maggie Penn, 2019. "A defense of Arrow’s independence of irrelevant alternatives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 145-164, April.
    7. David McCune & Adam Graham-Squire, 2023. "Monotonicity Anomalies in Scottish Local Government Elections," Papers 2305.17741, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2023.
    8. Sean Ingham, 2019. "Why Arrow’s theorem matters for political theory even if preference cycles never occur," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 97-111, April.
    9. Maurice Salles, 2015. "Democracy, the theory of voting, and mathematics: a review of Andrank Tangian’s ‘Mathematical theory of democracy’," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 209-216, January.
    10. Diss, Mostapha & Dougherty, Keith & Heckelman, Jac C., 2023. "When ties are possible: Weak Condorcet winners and Arrovian rationality," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 128-136.
    11. John Patty & Elizabeth Penn, 2011. "A social choice theory of legitimacy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 36(3), pages 365-382, April.
    12. Bjørn Rasch, 2014. "Insincere voting under the successive procedure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 499-511, March.
    13. Wilson, Mark C. & Pritchard, Geoffrey, 2007. "Probability calculations under the IAC hypothesis," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 244-256, December.
    14. Malthe Munkøe, 2014. "Cycles and instability in politics. Evidence from the 2009 Danish municipal elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 383-397, March.
    15. Scott Feld & Samuel Merrill & Bernard Grofman, 2014. "Modeling the effects of changing issue salience in two-party competition," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 465-482, March.
    16. Richard Potthoff, 2013. "Simple manipulation-resistant voting systems designed to elect Condorcet candidates and suitable for large-scale public elections," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(1), pages 101-122, January.
    17. Menezes, Mozart B.C. & da Silveira, Giovani J.C. & Drezner, Zvi, 2016. "Democratic elections and centralized decisions: Condorcet and Approval Voting compared with Median and Coverage locations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 253(1), pages 195-203.
    18. Adrian Deemen, 2014. "On the empirical relevance of Condorcet’s paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 311-330, March.
    19. Nicholas R. Miller, 2017. "Closeness matters: monotonicity failure in IRV elections with three candidates," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 91-108, October.
    20. Nicholas R. Miller, 2019. "Reflections on Arrow’s theorem and voting rules," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 179(1), pages 113-124, April.

    Book Chapters

    The following chapters of this book are listed in IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economics and Finance; Politics and Public Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • H0 - Public Economics - - General

    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:elg:eebook:15584. 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: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.com .

    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.