IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v36y1981i1p115-134.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic decisions under one-stage multi-candidate voting systems

Author

Listed:
  • Samuel Merrill

Abstract

We have seen that under the assumptions of this study the problem of maximizing a voter's total utility for a number of one-stage decision rules for multi-candidate elections may be specified as linear (or quadratic) programs. Potentially optimal strategies emerge as extreme points of the feasible region in the sense that no other strategies can be uniquely optimal. Categorical, approval, Borda, and z-score decision rules are all minimal in the sense that for each, the feasible region (with abstentions excepted) consists entirely of potentially uniquely optimal strategies. For each of these decision rules we have determined the optimal strategies explicitly in terms of the voter's utility function. Among the minimal voting systems studies, we argue that the voter's task of estimating his optimal strategy is least difficult under approval voting. Application of optimal strategies to the results of a thermometer scale survey suggest that the approval, Borda, and z-score decision rules can produce results very similar to one another but very different from that of categorical voting. Furthermore, for this survey, the former three systems were far less sensitive than categorical voting to the withdrawal of some of the candidates. Copyright Martinus Nijhoff Publishers bv 1981

Suggested Citation

  • Samuel Merrill, 1981. "Strategic decisions under one-stage multi-candidate voting systems," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 115-134, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:36:y:1981:i:1:p:115-134
    DOI: 10.1007/BF00163774
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00163774
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF00163774?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Joslyn, 1976. "The impact of decision rules in multi-candidate campaigns," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 1-17, March.
    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. Thomas A. Rietz, 1993. "Strategic Behavior in Multi-Alternative Elections: A Review of Some Experimental Evidence," Discussion Papers 1026, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    2. Samuel Merrill, 1985. "A statistical model for Condorcet efficiency based on simulation under spatial model assumptions," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 389-403, January.
    3. Lehtinen, Aki, 2008. "The welfare consequences of strategic behaviour under approval and plurality voting," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 688-704, September.
    4. Ilia Tsetlin, 2006. "A Method for Eliciting Utilities and its Application to Collective Choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 51-62, August.

    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. Amnon Rapoport & Dan Felsenthal & Zeev Maoz, 1988. "Proportional representation: An empirical evaluation of single-stage, non-ranked voting procedures," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 151-165, November.

    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:kap:pubcho:v:36:y:1981:i:1:p:115-134. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.