Skip navigation
Skip navigation

The probability of inconsistencies in complex collective decisions

List, Christian

Description

Many groups make decisions over multiple interconnected propositions. The "doctrinal paradox" or "discursive dilemma" shows that propositionwise majority voting can generate inconsistent collective sets of judgments, even when individual sets of judgments are all consistent. I develop a simple model for determining the probability of the paradox, given various assumptions about the probability distribution of individual sets of judgments, including impartial culture and impartial anonymous...[Show more]

dc.contributor.authorList, Christian
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-13T23:04:14Z
dc.identifier.issn0176-1714
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1885/85276
dc.description.abstractMany groups make decisions over multiple interconnected propositions. The "doctrinal paradox" or "discursive dilemma" shows that propositionwise majority voting can generate inconsistent collective sets of judgments, even when individual sets of judgments are all consistent. I develop a simple model for determining the probability of the paradox, given various assumptions about the probability distribution of individual sets of judgments, including impartial culture and impartial anonymous culture assumptions. I prove several convergence results, identifying when the probability of the paradox converges to 1, and when it converges to 0, as the number of individuals increases. Drawing on the Condorcet jury theorem and work by Bovens and Rabinowicz (2001, 2003), I use the model to assess the "truth- tracking" performance of two decision procedures, the premise- and conclusion-based procedures. I compare the present results with existing results on the probability of Condorcet's paradox. I suggest that the doctrinal paradox is likely to occur under plausible conditions.
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.sourceSocial Choice and Welfare
dc.titleThe probability of inconsistencies in complex collective decisions
dc.typeJournal article
local.description.notesImported from ARIES
local.description.refereedYes
local.identifier.citationvolume24
dc.date.issued2005
local.identifier.absfor160609 - Political Theory and Political Philosophy
local.identifier.absfor220302 - Decision Theory
local.identifier.ariespublicationMigratedxPub13598
local.type.statusPublished Version
local.contributor.affiliationList, Christian, College of Arts and Social Sciences, ANU
local.description.embargo2037-12-31
local.bibliographicCitation.issue1
local.bibliographicCitation.startpage3
local.bibliographicCitation.lastpage32
local.identifier.doi10.1007/s00355-003-0253-7
dc.date.updated2015-12-12T07:54:13Z
local.identifier.scopusID2-s2.0-17444371710
CollectionsANU Research Publications

Download

File Description SizeFormat Image
01_List_The_probability_of_2005.pdf385.74 kBAdobe PDF    Request a copy


Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Updated:  17 November 2022/ Responsible Officer:  University Librarian/ Page Contact:  Library Systems & Web Coordinator