Propositionwise judgment aggregation: the general case
In the theory of judgment aggregation, it is known for which agendas of propositions it is possible to aggregate individual judgments into collective ones in accordance with the Arrow-inspired requirements of universal domain, collective rationality, unanimity preservation, non-dictatorship and propositionwise independence. But it is only partially known (e.g., only in the monotonic case) for which agendas it is possible to respect additional requirements, notably non-oligarchy, anonymity, no individual veto power, or extended unanimity preservation. We fully characterize the agendas for which there are such possibilities, thereby answering the most salient open questions about propositionwise judgment aggregation. Our results build on earlier results by Nehring and Puppe (Strategy-proof social choice on single-peaked domains: possibility, impossibility and the space between, 2002 ), Nehring (Oligarchies in judgment aggregation: a characterization, 2006 ), Dietrich and List (Soc Choice Welf 29(1):19–33, 2007a ) and Dokow and Holzman (J Econ Theory 145(2):495–511, 2010a ). Copyright The Author(s) 2013
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 40 (2013)
Issue (Month): 4 (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://link.springer.de/link/service/journals/00355/index.htm|
|Order Information:||Web: http://link.springer.de/orders.htm|
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.:
- Marcus Pivato, 2009. "Geometric models of consistent judgement aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 559-574, November.
- Dietrich Franz & Mongin Philippe, 2008.
"The Premiss-Based Approach to Judgment Aggregation,"
013, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
- Dietrich, Franz & Mongin, Philippe, 2010. "The premiss-based approach to judgment aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 562-582, March.
- Franz Dietrich & Philippe Mongin, 2010. "The premiss-based approach to judgment aggregation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27896, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Michael Miller & Daniel Osherson, 2009. "Methods for distance-based judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 575-601, May.
- Dietrich Franz & List Christian, 2007.
"Judgment aggregation without full rationality,"
023, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
- Franz Dietrich, 2007.
"A generalised model of judgment aggregation,"
Social Choice and Welfare,
Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 529-565, June.
- Klaus Nehring & Clemens Puppe, 2008. "Consistent judgement aggregation: the truth-functional case," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 41-57, June.
- Nehring, Klaus, 2003. "Arrow's theorem as a corollary," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 379-382, September.
- Philippe Mongin, 2005.
"Factoring Out the Impossibility of Logical Aggregation,"
- Mongin, Philippe, 2008. "Factoring out the impossibility of logical aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 100-113, July.
- Mongin, Philippe, 2006. "Factoring out the impossibility of logical aggregation," Les Cahiers de Recherche 854, HEC Paris.
- Duggan, John, 1999. "A General Extension Theorem for Binary Relations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 1-16, May.
- List, Christian & Pettit, Philip, 2002. "Aggregating Sets of Judgments: An Impossibility Result," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(01), pages 89-110, April.
- Rubinstein, Ariel & Fishburn, Peter C., 1986. "Algebraic aggregation theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 63-77, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sochwe:v:40:y:2013:i:4:p:1067-1095. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.