IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Preference aggregation theory without acyclicity: The core without majority dissatisfaction

  • Kumabe, Masahiro
  • Mihara, H. Reiju

Acyclicity of individual preferences is a minimal assumption in social choice theory. We replace that assumption by the direct assumption that preferences have maximal elements on a fixed agenda. We show that the core of a simple game is nonempty for all profiles of such preferences if and only if the number of alternatives in the agenda is less than the Nakamura number of the game. The same is true if we replace the core by the core without majority dissatisfaction, obtained by deleting from the agenda all the alternatives that are non-maximal for all players in a winning coalition. Unlike the core, the core without majority dissatisfaction depends only on the players' sets of maximal elements and is included in the union of such sets. A result for an extended framework gives another sense in which the core without majority dissatisfaction behaves better than the core.

If 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Games and Economic Behavior.

Volume (Year): 72 (2011)
Issue (Month): 1 (May)
Pages: 187-201

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:72:y:2011:i:1:p:187-201
Contact details of provider: Web page:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. E. Ray Canterbery, 1984. "Introduction," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, M.E. Sharpe, Inc., vol. 7(1), pages 4-6, October.
  2. Mathieu Martin & Vincent Merlin, 2006. "On the Chacteristic Numbers of Voting Games," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200609, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
  3. Attila Ambrus & Kareen Rozen, 2008. "Revealed Conflicting Preferences," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000002161, David K. Levine.
  4. Le Breton, M & Salles, M, 1990. "The Stability Set of Voting Games: Classification and Genericity Results," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 111-27.
  5. Kumabe, Masahiro & Mihara, H. Reiju, 2007. "The Nakamura numbers for computable simple games," MPRA Paper 3684, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  6. Andjiga, N G & Moulen, J, 1989. "Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for l-Stability of Games in Constitutional Form," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 91-110.
  7. John Duggan, 2007. "A systematic approach to the construction of non-empty choice sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 491-506, April.
  8. Gil Kalai & Ariel Rubinstein & Ran Spiegler, 2002. "Rationalizing Choice Functions By Multiple Rationales," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(6), pages 2481-2488, November.
  9. H. Reiju Mihara, 1997. "Arrow's Theorem, countably many agents, and more visible invisible dictators," Public Economics 9705001, EconWPA, revised 07 May 1997.
  10. Banks, Jeffrey S., 1984. "Sophisticated Voting Outcomes and Agenda Control," Working Papers 524, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
  11. H. Reiju Mihara, 1997. "Arrow's Theorem and Turing computability," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 257-276.
  12. Truchon, Michel, 1995. "Voting games and acyclic collective choice rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 165-179, April.
  13. Elizabeth Penn, 2006. "The Banks Set in Infinite Spaces," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 531-543, December.
  14. Attila Ambrus & Kareen Rozen, 2012. "Rationalizing Choice with Multi-Self Models," Working Papers 12-11, Duke University, Department of Economics.
  15. Lipman, Barton L, 1991. "How to Decide How to Decide How to. . . : Modeling Limited Rationality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(4), pages 1105-25, July.
  16. Kumabe, Masahiro & Mihara, H. Reiju, 2008. "Computability of simple games: A characterization and application to the core," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3-4), pages 348-366, February.
  17. H. Reiju Mihara, 2000. "Coalitionally strategyproof functions depend only on the most-preferred alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 393-402.
  18. Partha Dasgupta & Eric Maskin, 2008. "On The Robustness of Majority Rule," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(5), pages 949-973, 09.
  19. Andjiga, Nicolas Gabriel & Moyouwou, Issofa, 2006. "A note on the non-emptiness of the stability set when individual preferences are weak orders," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 67-76, July.
  20. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1980. "Stability of decision systems under majority rule," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 150-159, October.
  21. Banks, Jeffrey & Duggan, John & Le Breton, Michel, 2003. "Social Choice and Electoral Competition in the General Spatial Model," IDEI Working Papers 188, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
  22. Andjiga, Nicolas Gabriel & Mbih, Boniface, 2000. "A note on the core of voting games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 367-372, April.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:72:y:2011:i:1:p:187-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.