IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v55y2008i2p190-204.html

Classifying interdependence in multidimensional binary preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Hodge, Jonathan K.
  • TerHaar, Micah

Abstract

When individual preferences over multiple dimensions are interdependent, the resulting collective decisions can be unsatisfactory and even paradoxical. The notion of separability formalizes this idea of interdependence, and preferences that are completely free from interdependence are said to be separable. In this paper, we develop a mechanism for classifying preferences according to the extent to which they achieve or fail to achieve the desirable property of separability. We show that binary preferences over multiple dimensions are surprisingly complex, in that their interdependence structures defy the most natural attempts at characterization. We also extend previous results pertaining to the rarity of separable preferences by showing that the probability of complete nonseparability approaches 1 as the number of dimensions increases without bound.

Suggested Citation

  • Hodge, Jonathan K. & TerHaar, Micah, 2008. "Classifying interdependence in multidimensional binary preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 190-204, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:55:y:2008:i:2:p:190-204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(07)00076-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. M. Gorman, 1968. "The Structure of Utility Functions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(4), pages 367-390.
    2. Bradley, W. James & Hodge, Jonathan K. & Kilgour, D. Marc, 2005. "Separable discrete preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 335-353, May.
    3. F. P. Murphy, 1981. "A Note on Weak Separability," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 48(4), pages 671-672.
    4. Jonathan Hodge & Peter Schwallier, 2006. "How Does Separability Affect The Desirability Of Referendum Election Outcomes?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 251-276, November.
    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. Clark Bowman & Jonathan Hodge & Ada Yu, 2014. "The potential of iterative voting to solve the separability problem in referendum elections," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 111-124, June.
    2. Lang, Jrme & Xia, Lirong, 2009. "Sequential composition of voting rules in multi-issue domains," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 304-324, May.

    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. , & ,, 2012. "Strategy-proof voting for multiple public goods," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 7(3), September.
    2. Tuğçe Çuhadaroğlu & Jean Lainé, 2012. "Pareto efficiency in multiple referendum," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(4), pages 525-536, April.
    3. Lang, Jrme & Xia, Lirong, 2009. "Sequential composition of voting rules in multi-issue domains," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 304-324, May.
    4. Jonathan Hodge & Peter Schwallier, 2006. "How Does Separability Affect The Desirability Of Referendum Election Outcomes?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 251-276, November.
    5. Hutchens, Robert M., 2012. "Measuring Segregation When Hierarchy Matters," IZA Discussion Papers 6667, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Peter A. Streufert, 2006. "Products of Several Relative Probabilities," University of Western Ontario, Departmental Research Report Series 20061, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
    7. Paolo Giovanni Piacquadio, 2017. "A Fairness Justification of Utilitarianism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1261-1276, July.
    8. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    9. Benoit Decerf, 2021. "Combining absolute and relative poverty: income poverty measurement with two poverty lines," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(2), pages 325-362, February.
    10. BLACKORBY, Charles & BOSSERT, Walter & DONALDSON, David, 2006. "Population Ethics," Cahiers de recherche 14-2006, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    11. M. Lasso de la Vega & Ana Urrutia, 2011. "Characterizing how to aggregate the individuals’ deprivations in a multidimensional framework," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 183-194, June.
    12. Nabil I. Al-Najjar & Luciano Pomatto, 2016. "Choice under aggregate uncertainty," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 187-209, February.
    13. Kochov, Asen, 2018. "A behavioral definition of unforeseen contingencies," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 265-290.
    14. Higgins, Sean & Lustig, Nora, 2016. "Can a poverty-reducing and progressive tax and transfer system hurt the poor?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 63-75.
    15. Arnaud Costinot & Jonathan Vogel, 2010. "Matching and Inequality in the World Economy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 747-786, August.
    16. Segal, Uzi & Sobel, Joel, 2002. "Min, Max, and Sum," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 126-150, September.
    17. Dorian Jullien, 2018. "Under Risk, Over Time, Regarding Other People: Language and Rationality within Three Dimensions," Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, in: Including a Symposium on Latin American Monetary Thought: Two Centuries in Search of Originality, volume 36, pages 119-155, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    18. , B. & ,, 2014. "Escaping the repugnant conclusion: rank-discounted utilitarianism with variable population," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(3), September.
    19. Antonin Macé, 2017. "Voting with evaluations: characterizations of evaluative voting and range voting," Working Papers halshs-01222200, HAL.
    20. M. Ali Khan & Metin Uyanık, 2021. "Topological connectedness and behavioral assumptions on preferences: a two-way relationship," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(2), pages 411-460, March.

    More about this item

    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:matsoc:v:55:y:2008:i:2:p:190-204. 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/inca/505565 .

    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.