IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v58y2009i2p265-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Arrow paradox with fuzzy preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Subramanian, S.

Abstract

This note considers a new factorization of a fuzzy weak binary preference relation into its asymmetric and symmetric parts. Arrow's General Possibility Theorem is then examined within the resulting framework of vague individual and social preferences. The outcome of this exercise is compared with some earlier results available in the literature on the Arrow paradox with fuzzy preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Subramanian, S., 2009. "The Arrow paradox with fuzzy preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 265-271, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:58:y:2009:i:2:p:265-271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(09)00055-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Barrett & Maurice Salles, 2006. "Social Choice With Fuzzy Preferences," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200615, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    2. Gregory Richardson, 1998. "The structure of fuzzy preferences: Social choice implications," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(3), pages 359-369.
    3. Dutta, Bhaskan, 1987. "Fuzzy preferences and social choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 215-229, June.
    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. Conal Duddy & Ashley Piggins, 2018. "On some oligarchy results when social preference is fuzzy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(4), pages 717-735, December.
    2. Louis Fono & Maurice Salles, 2011. "Continuity of utility functions representing fuzzy preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 669-682, October.
    3. Conal Duddy & Juan Perote-Peña & Ashley Piggins, 2011. "Arrow’s theorem and max-star transitivity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 36(1), pages 25-34, January.
    4. Armajac Raventós-Pujol & María J. Campión & Esteban Induráin, 2020. "Decomposition and Arrow-Like Aggregation of Fuzzy Preferences," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Perote-Pena, Juan & Piggins, Ashley, 2007. "Strategy-proof fuzzy aggregation rules," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 564-580, June.
    6. Richard Barrett & Maurice Salles, 2006. "Social Choice With Fuzzy Preferences," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200615, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
    7. Dinko Dimitrov, 2001. "Fuzzy Preferences, Liberalism and Non-discrimination," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 63-76.
    8. Peter Casey & Mark Wierman & Michael Gibilisco & John Mordeson & Terry Clark, 2012. "Assessing policy stability in Iraq: a fuzzy approach to modeling preferences," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 409-423, June.
    9. S. Subramanian, 2010. "Liberty, equality, and impossibility: some general results in the space of 'soft' preferences," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 325-341.
    10. M. Sanver & Özer Selçuk, 2009. "Sophisticated preference aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(1), pages 73-86, June.
    11. Hannu Nurmi, 2001. "Resolving Group Choice Paradoxes Using Probabilistic and Fuzzy Concepts," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 177-199, March.
    12. Piggins, Ashley & Duddy, Conal, 2016. "Oligarchy and soft incompleteness," MPRA Paper 72392, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Espin, Rafael & Fernandez, Eduardo & Mazcorro, Gustavo & Lecich, Maria Ines, 2007. "A fuzzy approach to cooperative n-person games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 176(3), pages 1735-1751, February.
    14. Heinrich H. Nax & Stefano Balietti & Ryan O. Murphy & Dirk Helbing, 2018. "Adding noise to the institution: an experimental welfare investigation of the contribution-based grouping mechanism," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(2), pages 213-245, February.
    15. Duddy, Conal & Piggins, Ashley, 2013. "Many-valued judgment aggregation: Characterizing the possibility/impossibility boundary," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 793-805.
    16. Maurice Salles, 2014. "‘Social choice and welfare’ at 30: its role in the development of social choice theory and welfare economics," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(1), pages 1-16, January.
    17. Federico Fioravanti, 2024. "Fuzzy Classification Aggregation," Papers 2402.17620, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    18. Robert Draeseke & David E. A. Giles, 1999. "A Fuzzy Logic Approach to Modelling the Underground Economy," Econometrics Working Papers 9909, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    19. José Luis Garcí a-Lapresta & Bonifacio Llamazares, 2010. "Preference Intensities and Majority Decisions Based on Difference of Support Between Alternatives," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 527-542, November.
    20. Yu, Tiffany Hui-Kuang & Wang, David Han-Min & Chen, Su-Jane, 2006. "A fuzzy logic approach to modeling the underground economy in Taiwan," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 362(2), pages 471-479.

    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:58:y:2009:i:2:p:265-271. 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.