IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/spr/joecth/v15y2000i3p689-700.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

A simple characterization of majority rule

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Mark Fey & Kevin Clarke, 2012. "Consistency of choice in nonparametric multiple comparisons," Journal of Nonparametric Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 531-541.
  2. Susumu Cato, 2011. "Pareto principles, positive responsiveness, and majority decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 503-518, October.
  3. Merrill, Lauren Nicole, 2011. "Parity dependence of a majority rule characterization on the Condorcet domain," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 259-261, September.
  4. Dimitrios Xefteris, 2013. "A necessary and sufficient single-profile condition for transitivity of the Pareto extension order," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 9(4), pages 313-317, December.
  5. Miroiu, Adrian, 2004. "Characterizing majority rule: from profiles to societies," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 359-363, December.
  6. Yi, Jianxin, 2005. "A complete characterization of majority rules," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 109-112, April.
  7. Woeginger, Gerhard J., 2005. "More on the majority rule: Profiles, societies, and responsiveness," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 7-11, July.
  8. Matías Núñez & Giacomo Valletta, 2015. "The informational basis of scoring rules," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 19(4), pages 279-297, December.
  9. Asan, Goksel & Sanver, M. Remzi, 2006. "Maskin monotonic aggregation rules," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 179-183, May.
  10. Josep Freixas & Montserrat Pons, 2021. "An extension and an alternative characterization of May’s theorem," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 302(1), pages 137-150, July.
  11. Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic characterization of different majority concepts," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(1), pages 160-173, May.
  12. McMorris, F.R. & Mulder, Henry Martyn & Novick, Beth & Powers, Robert C., 2021. "Majority rule for profiles of arbitrary length, with an emphasis on the consistency axiom," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 164-174.
  13. Asan, Goksel & Sanver, M. Remzi, 2002. "Another characterization of the majority rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 409-413, May.
  14. 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.
  15. Llamazares, Bonifacio, 2006. "The forgotten decision rules: Majority rules based on difference of votes," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 311-326, May.
  16. Adrian Miroiu, 2018. "Single-profile axiomatizations of the plurality and the simple majority rules," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(1), pages 13-19.
  17. Antonio Quesada, 2013. "The majority rule with a chairman," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 40(3), pages 679-691, March.
  18. J. Woeginger, Gerhard, 2003. "A new characterization of the majority rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 89-94, October.
  19. Riste Gjorgjiev & Dimitrios Xefteris, 2015. "Transitive supermajority rule relations," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(2), pages 299-312, October.
  20. Campbell, Donald E. & Kelly, Jerry S., 2011. "Majority selection of one alternative from a binary agenda," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 272-273, March.
  21. José Luis Garcí a-Lapresta & Bonifacio Llamazares, 2010. "Preference Intensities and Majority Decisions Based on Difference of Support Between Alternatives," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 527-542, November.
  22. F. McMorris & R. Powers, 2008. "The majority decision function for trees with 3 leaves," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 169-175, October.
  23. McMorris, F.R. & Powers, R.C., 2013. "Majority decision on median semilattices," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-51.
  24. Remzi Sanver, M., 2006. "Nash implementation of the majority rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 369-372, June.
  25. Nuñez, M. & Valletta, G., 2012. "The information simplicity of scoring rules," Research Memorandum 011, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  26. Campbell, Donald E. & Kelly, Jerry S., 2013. "Anonymity, monotonicity, and limited neutrality: Selecting a single alternative from a binary agenda," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 10-12.
  27. 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.
  28. Adrian Miroiu, 2021. "Majority Voting and Higher-Order Societies," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 983-999, October.
  29. Adrian Miroiu, 2020. "Coalitions of concerned voters: a characterization of the majority rule," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(4), pages 2717-2722.
  30. Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2011. "Collectively rational voting rules for simple preferences," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 143-149, March.
  31. Xu, Yongsheng & Zhong, Zhen, 2010. "Single profile of preferences with variable societies: A characterization of simple majority rule," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 119-121, May.
  32. Eyal Baharad & Shmuel Nitzan, 2016. "Is majority consistency possible?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(2), pages 287-299, February.
  33. Teo Chung Piaw & Jay Sethuraman & Rakesh V. Vohra, 2001. "Integer Programming and Arrovian Social Welfare Functions," Discussion Papers 1316, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
  34. M. Sanver, 2009. "Characterizations of majoritarianism: a unified approach," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(1), pages 159-171, June.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.