IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v21y2026i4p697-706n1006.html

Does Quadratic Voting for Survey Research Improve Policy-Making and Decision Outcomes?

Author

Listed:
  • Bassetti Madeline E.

    (Development Impact Evaluation (DIME) Group, The World Bank, Washington, DC, USA)

  • Chen Daniel L.

    (Toulouse School of Economics, Institute for Advanced Studies, 21 allée de Brienne, 31015, Cedex 6, Toulouse, France)

  • Dias Gustavo

    (Department of Economics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA)

Abstract

This pilot study explores the feasibility of using Quadratic Voting for Survey Research (QVSR) as an alternative to the traditional Likert scale in a municipal decision-making context. By observing decision-makers’ behavior and voting outcomes, the study provides descriptive evidence on how these two survey methodologies perform in practice. While standard democratic processes often overlook the intensity of citizen preferences, QVSR allows individuals to express preference strength using a limited credit system. In contrast, the Likert scale, though widely used, may be susceptible to response biases and assumptions about sincerity. Previous studies have demonstrated the theoretical and experimental promise of QVSR; this pilot extends that work by assessing its feasibility and practical implementation in a real-world policy environment. Conducted in the Gabba Ward municipality in Brisbane, Australia, the study randomly assigned citizens and policymakers to QVSR or Likert conditions and describes patterns in the alignment between citizen responses and councilor voting. The results are exploratory and intended to inform future, larger-scale evaluations of QVSR’s potential to support more nuanced and representative forms of democratic engagement.

Suggested Citation

  • Bassetti Madeline E. & Chen Daniel L. & Dias Gustavo, 2026. "Does Quadratic Voting for Survey Research Improve Policy-Making and Decision Outcomes?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 21(4), pages 697-706.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:21:y:2026:i:4:p:697-706:n:1006
    DOI: 10.1515/rle-2025-0078
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2025-0078
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/rle-2025-0078?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior

    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:bpj:rlecon:v:21:y:2026:i:4:p:697-706:n:1006. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyterbrill.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.