IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/ecm/emetrp/v37y1969i3p490-506.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

The Simple Majority Decision Rule

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Bossert, Walter & Peters, Hans, 2014. "Single-basined choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 162-168.
  2. Susumu Cato, 2011. "Pareto principles, positive responsiveness, and majority decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 503-518, October.
  3. Biung-Ghi Ju, 2005. "A characterization of plurality-like rules based on non-manipulability, restricted efficiency, and anonymity," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 33(3), pages 335-354, September.
  4. 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.
  5. Edith Elkind & Piotr Faliszewski & Piotr Skowron, 2020. "A characterization of the single-peaked single-crossing domain," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(1), pages 167-181, January.
  6. Raúl Pérez-Fernández & José Luis García-Lapresta & Bernard De Baets, 2019. "Chronicle of a Failure Foretold: 2017 Rector Election at Ghent University," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, January.
  7. Miller, Alan D. & Rachmilevitch, Shiran, "undated". "A Behavioral Arrow Theorem," Working Papers WP2012/7, University of Haifa, Department of Economics.
  8. Bossert, Walter & Peters, Hans, 2013. "Single-plateaued choice," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 134-139.
  9. Walter Bossert & Hans Peters, 2009. "Single-peaked choice," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 41(2), pages 213-230, November.
  10. Diss, Mostapha & Mahajne, Muhammad, 2020. "Social acceptability of Condorcet committees," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 14-27.
  11. Madhuparna Karmokar & Souvik Roy & Ton Storcken, 2021. "Necessary and sufficient conditions for pairwise majority decisions on path-connected domains," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(3), pages 313-336, October.
  12. Martin Shubik, 1973. "Game Theory and Political Science," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 351, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
  13. Brandl, Florian & Peters, Dominik, 2022. "Approval voting under dichotomous preferences: A catalogue of characterizations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
  14. Miguel Angel Ballester & Guillaume Haeringer, 2006. "A Characterization of Single-Peaked Preferences," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 656.06, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
  15. Weddepohl, H.N., 1970. "Vector representation of majority voting," Other publications TiSEM 67e45433-850c-420e-bfcd-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  16. Akram Dehnokhalaji & Pekka J. Korhonen & Murat Köksalan & Nasim Nasrabadi & Diclehan Tezcaner Öztürk & Jyrki Wallenius, 2014. "Constructing a strict total order for alternatives characterized by multiple criteria: An extension," Naval Research Logistics (NRL), John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 155-163, March.
  17. Gilbert Laffond & Jean Lainé, 2014. "Triple-consistent social choice and the majority rule," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(2), pages 784-799, July.
  18. Susumu Cato & Adrien Lutz, 2018. "Kenneth Arrow, moral obligations, and public policies," Working Papers 1841, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
  19. John Duggan, 2016. "Preference exclusions for social rationality," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 93-118, January.
  20. Moyouwou, Issofa & Pongou, Roland & Tchantcho, Bertrand, 2015. "Fraudulent Democracy: A Dynamic Ordinal Game Approach," MPRA Paper 65583, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  21. Kevin Roberts, 2007. "Condorcet cycles? A model of intertemporal voting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 29(3), pages 383-404, October.
  22. Maurice Salles, 2006. "La théorie du choix social : de l'importance des mathématiques," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes 1 & University of Caen) 200617, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes 1, University of Caen and CNRS.
  23. Kotaro Suzumura, 2002. "Introduction to social choice and welfare," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 442, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
  24. Li, Guanhao, 2023. "A classification of peak-pit maximal Condorcet domains," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 42-57.
  25. Geslin, Stephanie & Salles, Maurice & Ziad, Abderrahmane, 2003. "Fuzzy aggregation in economic environments: I. Quantitative fuzziness, public goods and monotonicity assumptions," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 155-166, April.
  26. Florian Brandl & Felix Brandt, 2020. "Arrovian Aggregation of Convex Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 799-844, March.
  27. Maurice Salles, 2005. "The launching of ‘social choice and welfare’ and the creation of the ‘society for social choice and welfare’," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 25(2), pages 557-564, December.
  28. Raúl Pérez-Fernández & Bernard De Baets, 2019. "The superdominance relation, the positional winner, and more missing links between Borda and Condorcet," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 31(1), pages 46-65, January.
  29. Ehud Kalai & Eitan Muller & Mark Satterthwaite, 1979. "Social welfare functions when preferences are convex, strictly monotonic, and continuous," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 87-97, March.
  30. Kelin Luo & Yinfeng Xu & Bowen Zhang & Huili Zhang, 2018. "Creating an acceptable consensus ranking for group decision making," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 307-328, July.
  31. Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2012. "A necessary and sufficient single-profile condition for transitivity of the majority rule relation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 516-518.
  32. Klaus, Bettina, 2017. "Consistency and its converse for roommate markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 43-58.
  33. Niclas Boehmer & Piotr Faliszewski & Rolf Niedermeier & Stanis{l}aw Szufa & Tomasz Wk{a}s, 2022. "Understanding Distance Measures Among Elections," Papers 2205.00492, arXiv.org.
  34. Adrian Deemen, 2014. "On the empirical relevance of Condorcet’s paradox," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 311-330, March.
  35. Salvatore Barbaro & Nils D. Steiner, 2022. "Majority principle and indeterminacy in German elections," Working Papers 2202, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
  36. Grainger, Daniel & Watkin-Lui, Felecia & Cheer, Karen, 2021. "The value of informed agency for Torres Strait climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
  37. Jiehua Chen & Kirk R. Pruhs & Gerhard J. Woeginger, 2017. "The one-dimensional Euclidean domain: finitely many obstructions are not enough," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(2), pages 409-432, February.
  38. Amartya Sen, 2020. "Majority decision and Condorcet winners," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 54(2), pages 211-217, March.
  39. Bredereck, Robert & Chen, Jiehua & Woeginger, Gerhard J., 2016. "Are there any nicely structured preference profiles nearby?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 61-73.
  40. Fujun Hou, 2022. "Reformulating the Value Restriction and the Not-Strict Value Restriction in Terms of Possibility Preference Map," Papers 2205.07400, arXiv.org.
  41. Raúl Pérez-Fernández & Bernard De Baets, 2018. "The supercovering relation, the pairwise winner, and more missing links between Borda and Condorcet," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(2), pages 329-352, February.
  42. Francesca Busetto & Giulio Codognato & Simone Tonin, 2017. "Nondictatorial Arrovian Social Welfare Functions, Simple Majority Rule and Integer Programming," Working Papers 2017_11, Durham University Business School.
  43. S. N. Rao, 1972. "On a Sufficient Condition for Transitivity of Majority Decision," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 16(2), pages 90-92, October.
  44. Jain, Satish, 2010. "Market, Democracy, and Diversity of Individual Preferences," Working Papers 7, JICA Research Institute.
  45. Robert Bredereck & Jiehua Chen & Gerhard Woeginger, 2013. "A characterization of the single-crossing domain," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(4), pages 989-998, October.
  46. Chung, Kim-Sau, 2000. "On the Existence of Stable Roommate Matchings," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 206-230, November.
  47. Alexander Karpov, 2019. "On the Number of Group-Separable Preference Profiles," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 501-517, June.
  48. Grainger, Daniel & Stoeckl, Natalie, 2019. "The importance of social learning for non-market valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
  49. Moser, Peter, 1999. "The impact of legislative institutions on public policy: a survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-33, March.
  50. Fujun Hou, 2022. "Conditions for Social Preference Transitivity When Cycle Involved and A $\hat{O}\mbox{-}\hat{I}$ Framework," Papers 2205.08223, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
  51. Toyotaka Sakai & Masaki Shimoji, 2006. "Dichotomous preferences and the possibility of Arrovian social choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 26(3), pages 435-445, June.
  52. Xefteris, Dimitrios, 2010. "The necessary and sufficient condition for the transitivity of the Majority Rule in the linear domain," MPRA Paper 24588, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  53. Busetto, Francesca & Codognato, Giulio & Tonin, Simone, 2021. "Simple majority rule and integer programming," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 160-163.
  54. Sven Berg & Bo Bjurulf, 1983. "A note on the paradox of voting: Anonymous preference profiles and May's formula," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 307-316, January.
  55. John Duggan, 2016. "Preference exclusions for social rationality," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(1), pages 93-118, January.
  56. Kant, Shashi & Lee, Susan, 2004. "A social choice approach to sustainable forest management: an analysis of multiple forest values in Northwestern Ontario," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 215-227, June.
  57. Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2011. "Collectively rational voting rules for simple preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 143-149, March.
  58. Arlegi, Ricardo & Teschl, Miriam, 2022. "Pareto rationalizability by two single-peaked preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-11.
  59. Marie-Louise Lackner & Martin Lackner, 2017. "On the likelihood of single-peaked preferences," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 717-745, April.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.