IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/riceco/2003-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Collective Choice under Dichotomous Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Bogomolnaia, Anna

    (Rice U)

  • Moulin, Herve
  • Stong, Richard

Abstract

Agents partition deterministic outcomes into good or bad. A direct revelation mechanism selects a lottery over outcomes - also interpreted as time-shares. Under such dichotomous preferences, the probability that the lottery outcome be a good one is a canonical utility representation. The utilitarian mechanism averages over all deterministic outcomes "approved" by the largest number of agents. It is efficient, strategy-proof and treats equally agents and outcomes. We reach the impossibility frontier if we also place the lower bound 1/n on each agent's utility, where n is the number of agents; or if this lower bound is the fraction of good outcomes to feasible outcomes. We conjecture that no ex-ante efficient and strategy-proof mechanism guarantees a strictly positive utility to all agents at all profiles, and prove a weaker version of this conjecture.

Suggested Citation

  • Bogomolnaia, Anna & Moulin, Herve & Stong, Richard, 2003. "Collective Choice under Dichotomous Preferences," Working Papers 2003-09, Rice University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:riceco:2003-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~econ/papers/2003papers/09bogomolnaia.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salvador Barbera, 1979. "Majority and Positional Voting in a Probabilistic Framework," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 379-389.
    2. Barbera, Salvador & Bogomolnaia, Anna & van der Stel, Hans, 1998. "Strategy-proof probabilistic rules for expected utility maximizers," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 89-103, March.
    3. Freixas, Xavier, 1984. "A cardinal approach to straightforward probabilistic mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 227-251, December.
    4. Shasikanta Nandeibam, 1998. "An alternative proof of Gibbard's random dictatorship result," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 15(4), pages 509-519.
    5. Gibbard, Allan, 1978. "Straightforwardness of Game Forms with Lotteries as Outcomes," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(3), pages 595-614, May.
    6. Dutta, Bhaskar & Peters, Hans & Sen, Arunava, 2002. "Strategy-Proof Probabilistic Mechanisms in Economies with Pure Public Goods," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 392-416, October.
    7. Anna Bogomolnaia & Herve Moulin, 2004. "Random Matching Under Dichotomous Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 257-279, January.
    8. Gibbard, Allan, 1977. "Manipulation of Schemes That Mix Voting with Chance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(3), pages 665-681, April.
    9. Fishburn, Peter C., 1978. "Axioms for approval voting: Direct proof," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 180-185, October.
    10. repec:cup:apsrev:v:72:y:1978:i:03:p:831-847_15 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Salvador Barberà & Lars Ehlers, 2011. "Free triples, large indifference classes and the majority rule," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 559-574, October.
    2. Jordi Massó & Marc Vorsatz, 2008. "Weighted approval voting," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 36(1), pages 129-146, July.
    3. Jérémy Picot, 2012. "Random aggregation without the Pareto principle," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 16(1), pages 1-13, March.
    4. José Alcantud & Ritxar Arlegi, 2012. "An axiomatic analysis of ranking sets under simple categorization," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 227-245, March.
    5. Marc Vorsatz, 2008. "Scoring rules on dichotomous preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(1), pages 151-162, June.
    6. repec:spr:sochwe:v:50:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s00355-017-1075-3 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Aziz, Haris & Brandt, Felix & Brill, Markus, 2013. "The computational complexity of random serial dictatorship," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(3), pages 341-345.
    8. Arlegi, Ritxar & Dimitrov, Dinko, 2016. "Power set extensions of dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 20-29.
    9. Duddy, Conal, 2015. "Fair sharing under dichotomous preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-5.
    10. Aziz, Haris & Brandl, Florian & Brandt, Felix, 2015. "Universal Pareto dominance and welfare for plausible utility functions," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 123-133.
    11. repec:eee:gamebe:v:106:y:2017:i:c:p:227-238 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:eee:matsoc:v:90:y:2017:i:c:p:28-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Wolitzky, Alexander, 2009. "Fully sincere voting," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 720-735, November.
    14. Brandl, Florian & Brandt, Felix & Suksompong, Warut, 2016. "The impossibility of extending random dictatorship to weak preferences," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 44-47.
    15. Conal Duddy & Ashley Piggins & William Zwicker, 2016. "Aggregation of binary evaluations: a Borda-like approach," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(2), pages 301-333, February.
    16. Sato, Shin, 2009. "Strategy-proof social choice with exogenous indifference classes," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 48-57, January.
    17. Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2011. "Collectively rational voting rules for simple preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 143-149, March.
    18. Chatterji, Shurojit & Roy, Souvik & Sen, Arunava, 2012. "The structure of strategy-proof random social choice functions over product domains and lexicographically separable preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 353-366.
    19. Picot, Jérémy & Sen, Arunava, 2012. "An extreme point characterization of random strategy-proof social choice functions: The two alternative case," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 49-52.
    20. repec:spr:sochwe:v:48:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s00355-017-1031-2 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Anna Bogomolnaia, 2015. "The Most Ordinally-Efficient of Random Voting Rules," HSE Working papers WP BRP 106/EC/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    22. Mariotti, Marco & Veneziani, Roberto, 2012. "Allocating chances of success in finite and infinite societies: The utilitarian criterion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 226-236.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory

    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:ecl:riceco:2003-09. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dericus.html .

    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 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.

    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.