IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01450829.html

The Impact of Dependence among Voters’ Preferences with Partial Indifference

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Friese

    (Institut für Mathematik - University of Rostock = Universität Rostock)

  • William V. Gehrlein

    (University of Delaware [Newark])

  • Dominique Lepelley

    (CEMOI - Centre d'Économie et de Management de l'Océan Indien - UR - Université de La Réunion)

  • Achill Schürmann

    (Institut für Mathematik - University of Rostock = Universität Rostock)

Abstract

Standard Weighted Scoring Rules do not directly accommodate the possibility that some voters might have dichotomous preferences in three-candidate elections. The direct solution to this issue would be to require voters to arbitrarily break their indifference ties on candidates and report complete rankings. This option was previously found to be a poor alternative when voters have completely independent references. The introduction of a smalldegree of dependence among voters' preferences has typically been found to make a significant reduction of the impact of such negative outcomes in earlier studies. However, we find that the forced ranking option continues to be a poor choice when dependence is introduced among voters' preferences. This conclusion is reinforced by the fact that other voting options like Approval Voting and Extended Scoring Rules have been found to produce much better results. These observations are made as a result of using a significant advancement in techniques that obtain probability representations for such outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Friese & William V. Gehrlein & Dominique Lepelley & Achill Schürmann, 2016. "The Impact of Dependence among Voters’ Preferences with Partial Indifference," Post-Print hal-01450829, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01450829
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-016-0446-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:hal:journl:hal-01450829. 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.

    We have no bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.