IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/qjecon/v102y1987i1p161-169..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preference Proximity and Anonymous Social Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Nick Baigent

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Nick Baigent, 1987. "Preference Proximity and Anonymous Social Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 102(1), pages 161-169.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:qjecon:v:102:y:1987:i:1:p:161-169.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1884686
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Can, B., 2013. "Distance rationalizability of scoring rules," Research Memorandum 068, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    2. Wu-Hsiung Huang, 2014. "Singularity and Arrow’s paradox," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(3), pages 671-706, March.
    3. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2007. "Strategy-Proof Judgment Aggregation," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(03), pages 269-300, November.
    4. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1990. "Social choice and the closed convergence topology," MPRA Paper 8353, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Lauwers, Luc, 2000. "Topological social choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-39, July.
    6. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2004:i:6:p:1-6 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Muhammad Mahajne & Shmuel Nitzan & Oscar Volij, 2013. "LEVEL r CONSENSUS AND STABLE SOCIAL CHOICE," Working Papers 1305, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    8. Shin Sato, 2015. "Bounded response and the equivalence of nonmanipulability and independence of irrelevant alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 44(1), pages 133-149, January.
    9. Edith Elkind & Piotr Faliszewski & Arkadii Slinko, 2015. "Distance rationalization of voting rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(2), pages 345-377, September.
    10. Nick Baigent & Daniel Eckert, 2004. "Abstract Aggregations and Proximity Preservation: An Impossibility Result," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 359-366, June.
    11. Wu-Hsiung Huang, 2009. "Is a continuous rational social aggregation impossible on continuum spaces?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(4), pages 635-686, May.
    12. repec:spr:grdene:v:21:y:2012:i:3:d:10.1007_s10726-010-9210-x is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Muhammad Mahajne & Shmuel Nitzan & Oscar Volij, 2015. "Level $$r$$ r consensus and stable social choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 805-817, December.
    14. Can, Burak & Storcken, Ton, 2013. "Update monotone preference rules," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 136-149.
    15. Nurmi, Hannu, 2005. "Aggregation problems in policy evaluation: an overview," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 287-300, June.
    16. Michael Miller & Daniel Osherson, 2009. "Methods for distance-based judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(4), pages 575-601, May.
    17. Conal Duddy & Ashley Piggins, 2012. "The proximity condition," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(2), pages 353-369, July.
    18. repec:eee:gamebe:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:1-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Daniel Eckert, 2004. "Proximity Preservation in an Anonymous Framework," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(6), pages 1-6.
    20. Luc Lauwers, 2002. "A note on Chichilnisky's social choice paradox," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 261-266, May.

    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:oup:qjecon:v:102:y:1987:i:1:p:161-169.. 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: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.