Explaining all three-alternative voting outcomes
成果类型：
Article
署名作者：
Saari, DG
署名单位：
Northwestern University
刊物名称：
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC THEORY
ISSN/ISSBN：
0022-0531
DOI：
10.1006/jeth.1999.2541
发表日期：
1999
页码：
313-355
关键词：
摘要：
A theory is developed to explain all possible three-alternative (single-profile) pairwise and positional voting outcomes. This includes all preference aggregation paradoxes, cycles, conflict between the Borda and Condorcet winners, differences among positional outcomes (e.g., the plurality and antiplurality methods), and differences among procedures using these outcomes (e.g., runoffs, Kemeny's rule, and Copeland's method). It is shown how to identify, interpret, and construct all profiles supporting each paradox. Among new conclusions, it is shown why a standard for the field, the Condorcet winner, is seriously flawed. (C) 1999 Academic Press.