IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/jetheo/v145y2010i2p544-561.html

Aggregation of binary evaluations with abstentions

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Conal Duddy & Ashley Piggins, 2012. "A measure of distance between judgment sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(4), pages 855-867, October.
  2. Dietrich, Franz, 2015. "Aggregation theory and the relevance of some issues to others," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 463-493.
  3. Bozbay, Irem, 2012. "Truth-Seeking Judgment Aggregation over Interconnected Issues," Working Papers 2012:31, Lund University, Department of Economics.
  4. Masaki Miyashita, 2021. "Premise-based vs conclusion-based collective choice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(2), pages 361-385, August.
  5. Kretz, Claudio & Puppe, Clemens, 2025. "Arrovian independence and the aggregation of choice functions," Working Paper Series in Economics 173, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Department of Economics and Management.
  6. Bozbay, İrem & Dietrich, Franz & Peters, Hans, 2014. "Judgment aggregation in search for the truth," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 571-590.
  7. List, Christian & Polak, Ben, 2010. "Introduction to judgment aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 441-466, March.
  8. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2019. "The relation between degrees of belief and binary beliefs: A general impossibility theorem," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 19001, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
  9. Luigi Marengo & Simona Settepanella & Yan X. Zhang, 2021. "Towards a unified aggregation framework for preferences and judgments," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 21-44, April.
  10. Schoch, Daniel, 2015. "Game Form Representation for Judgement and Arrovian Aggregation," MPRA Paper 64311, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  11. Dietrich, Franz & Mongin, Philippe, 2010. "The premiss-based approach to judgment aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 562-582, March.
  12. Nehring, Klaus & Puppe, Clemens, 2010. "Justifiable group choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 583-602, March.
  13. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-01249513 is not listed on IDEAS
  14. Dietrich, Franz, 2016. "Judgment aggregation and agenda manipulation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 113-136.
  15. Franz Dietrich & Kai Spiekermann, 2021. "Social Epistemology," Post-Print halshs-02431971, HAL.
  16. Crès, Hervé & Gilboa, Itzhak & Vieille, Nicolas, 2024. "Bureaucracy in quest of feasibility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
  17. Massimo D’Antoni, 2025. "From Condorcet’s paradox to Arrow: yet another simple proof of the impossibility theorem," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 64(4), pages 961-970, June.
  18. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2024. "Dynamically rational judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 63(3), pages 531-580, November.
  19. Frederik S. Herzberg, 2013. "The (im)possibility of collective risk measurement: Arrovian aggregation of variational preferences," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 1(1), pages 69-92, May.
  20. Nehring, Klaus & Puppe, Clemens, 2010. "Abstract Arrowian aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 467-494, March.
  21. Franz Dietrich, 2014. "Scoring rules for judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(4), pages 873-911, April.
  22. Zoi Terzopoulou & Ulle Endriss, 2020. "Neutrality and relative acceptability in judgment aggregation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 55(1), pages 25-49, June.
  23. Duddy, Conal & Piggins, Ashley, 2013. "Many-valued judgment aggregation: Characterizing the possibility/impossibility boundary," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(2), pages 793-805.
  24. Nehring, Klaus & Pivato, Marcus & Puppe, Clemens, 2014. "The Condorcet set: Majority voting over interconnected propositions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 268-303.
  25. Philippe Mongin, 2012. "The doctrinal paradox, the discursive dilemma, and logical aggregation theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 315-355, September.
  26. 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.
  27. Franz Dietrich & Christian List, 2017. "Probabilistic opinion pooling generalized. Part one: general agendas," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(4), pages 747-786, April.
  28. Eckert, Daniel & Klamler, Christian, 2010. "An equity-efficiency trade-off in a geometric approach to committee selection," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 386-391, September.
  29. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2010. "Majority voting on restricted domains," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 512-543, March.
  30. Nehring, Klaus & Pivato, Marcus & Puppe, Clemens, 2011. "Condorcet admissibility: Indeterminacy and path-dependence under majority voting on interconnected decisions," MPRA Paper 32434, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  31. Mario Szegedy & Yixin Xu, 2015. "Impossibility Theorems and the Universal Algebraic Toolkit," Papers 1506.01315, arXiv.org.
  32. Baharad, Eyal & Neeman, Zvika & Rubinchik, Anna, 2020. "The rarity of consistent aggregators," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 146-149.
  33. Terzopoulou, Zoi, 2020. "Quota rules for incomplete judgments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 23-36.
  34. Beg, Ismat & Syed, Ayesha, 2016. "An interactive fuzzy judgment aggregation model for consensus with partially undecided judges," MPRA Paper 96096, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 14 Apr 2017.
  35. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2021. "On anonymous and weighted voting systems," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(4), pages 477-491, November.
  36. Minkyung Wang & Chisu Kim, 2025. "Aggregating credences into beliefs: agenda conditions for impossibility results," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 65(1), pages 91-116, August.
  37. Peleg, Bezalel & Zamir, Shmuel, 2018. "Judgments aggregation by a sequential majority procedure," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 37-46.
  38. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2014. "Probabilistic Opinion Pooling," MPRA Paper 54806, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  39. Daniel Eckert & Christian Klamler, 2014. "A note on evaluating freedom of opinion," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(3), pages 1805-1813.
  40. Klaus Nehring & Marcus Pivato & Clemens Puppe, 2016. "Unanimity overruled: Majority voting and the burden of history," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(4), pages 552-597, October.
  41. Jianxin Yi, 2021. "Nash implementation via mechanisms that allow for abstentions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(2), pages 279-288, September.
  42. Philippe Mongin, 2012. "Une source méconnue de la théorie de l'agrégation des jugements," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 63(4), pages 645-657.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.