IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v254y2025ics0165176525003222.html

The manipulability of the deferred acceptance mechanism without outside options

Author

Listed:
  • Cai, Zhengyang

Abstract

In the Gale–Shapley marriage model where agents cannot declare potential partners as unacceptable, the number of manipulating agents of the man-proposing deferred acceptance mechanism is minimum among all stable mechanisms if and only if men are fewer than women. When the numbers of agents on both sides of the market are equal, we demonstrate that the deferred acceptance mechanism might not possess the aforementioned least manipulability property. However, if the preference profile is symmetrically tiered, as previously studied by Kesten (2010), and there are no more than three agents in the last tier, the deferred acceptance mechanism still possesses that property.

Suggested Citation

  • Cai, Zhengyang, 2025. "The manipulability of the deferred acceptance mechanism without outside options," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 254(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:254:y:2025:i:c:s0165176525003222
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2025.112485
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176525003222
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2025.112485?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sirguiado, Camilo J., 2024. "A characterization of stable mechanisms that minimize manipulation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    2. Bonkoungou, Somouaoga & Nesterov, Alexander, 2023. "Incentives in matching markets: counting and comparing manipulating agents," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 18(3), July.
    3. Sirguiado, Camilo J. & Torres-Martínez, Juan Pablo, 2024. "Strategic behavior in one-to-one matching markets without outside options," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 385-397.
    4. Parag A. Pathak & Tayfun Sönmez, 2013. "School Admissions Reform in Chicago and England: Comparing Mechanisms by Their Vulnerability to Manipulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 80-106, February.
    5. Onur Kesten, 2010. "School Choice with Consent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(3), pages 1297-1348.
    6. Alvin E. Roth, 1982. "The Economics of Matching: Stability and Incentives," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 617-628, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Onur Kesten, 2012. "On two kinds of manipulation for school choice problems," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 51(3), pages 677-693, November.
    2. Morrill, Thayer, 2015. "Making just school assignments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 18-27.
    3. Somouaoga Bonkoungou & Alexander Nesterov, 2020. "Reforms meet fairness concerns in school and college admissions," Papers 2009.05245, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
    4. Somouaoga Bonkoungou & Alexander Nesterov, 2025. "When do reforms meet fairness concerns in school admissions?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 65(2), pages 449-473, September.
    5. Harless, Patrick, 2014. "A School Choice Compromise: Between Immediate and Deferred Acceptance," MPRA Paper 61417, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Troyan, Peter & Morrill, Thayer, 2020. "Obvious manipulations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    7. Turhan, Bertan, 2019. "Welfare and incentives in partitioned school choice markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 199-208.
    8. Sirguiado, Camilo J., 2024. "A characterization of stable mechanisms that minimize manipulation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    9. Hirata, Daisuke & Kasuya, Yusuke, 2017. "On stable and strategy-proof rules in matching markets with contracts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 27-43.
    10. Bó, Inácio & Hakimov, Rustamdjan, 2022. "The iterative deferred acceptance mechanism," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 411-433.
    11. Atila Abdulkadiroglu & Tommy Andersson, 2022. "School Choice," NBER Working Papers 29822, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Can, Burak & Pourpouneh, Mohsen & Storcken, Ton, 2017. "Cost of transformation: a measure on matchings," Research Memorandum 015, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    13. Ata Atay & Ana Mauleon & Vincent Vannetelbosch, 2025. "Limited Farsightedness in Priority‐Based Matching," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 27(4), August.
    14. Alexander Nesterov & Olga Rospuskova & Sofia Rubtcova, 2024. "Robustness to manipulations in school choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 62(3), pages 519-548, May.
    15. Diether W Beuermann & C Kirabo Jackson & Laia Navarro-Sola & Francisco Pardo, 2023. "What is a Good School, and Can Parents Tell? Evidence on the Multidimensionality of School Output," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(1), pages 65-101.
    16. Afacan, Mustafa Og̃uz & Dur, Umut Mert, 2017. "When preference misreporting is Harm[less]ful?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 16-24.
    17. James Boudreau & Vicki Knoblauch, 2013. "Preferences and the price of stability in matching markets," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(4), pages 565-589, April.
    18. Diebold, Franz & Bichler, Martin, 2017. "Matching with indifferences: A comparison of algorithms in the context of course allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 260(1), pages 268-282.
    19. Kojima, Fuhito, 2013. "Efficient resource allocation under multi-unit demand," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 1-14.
    20. Zhang, Luosai, 2025. "The properness of weak stability notions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design

    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:eee:ecolet:v:254:y:2025:i:c:s0165176525003222. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.