Sincere Voting with Cardinal Preferences: Approval Voting
We discuss sincere voting when voters have cardinal preferences over alter- natives. We interpret sincerity as opposed to strategic voting, and thus define sincerity as the optimal behaviour when conditions to vote strategically vanish. When voting mechanisms allow for only one message type we show that this op- timal behaviour coincides with an intuitive and common definition of sincerity. For voting mechanisms allowing for multiple message types, such as approval vot- ing (AV), there exists no conclusive definition of sincerity in the literature. We show that for AV, voters' optimal strategy tends to one of the existent definitions of sincerity, consisting in voting for those alternatives that yield more than the average of cardinal utilities.
|Date of creation:||15 Jan 2007|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: 34 93 592 1203
Fax: +34 93 542-1223
Web page: http://pareto.uab.cat
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Goeree, Jacob K. & Holt, Charles A., 2004.
"A model of noisy introspection,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 365-382, February.
- Enriqueta Aragonès & Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Weiss, 2005.
"Making Statements and Approval Voting,"
237, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aub:autbar:675.07. 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: (Xavier Vila)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.