Impact of a priori positive information on the results of voting methods

H. Sosnowska, M. Ramsza, Paweł Zawiślak
{"title":"Impact of a priori positive information on the results of voting methods","authors":"H. Sosnowska, M. Ramsza, Paweł Zawiślak","doi":"10.59139/ps.2022.04.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to present the results of experiments relating to voting methods based on the bounded rationality theory. The research demonstrated that a positive nudge changes the voting results. The study focused on three methods of voting: the Borda Count method, the Condorcet winner method and the anti-manipulation method. In a laboratory experiment, the subjects were asked to select the best musician. They were to manipulate their voting so that a predetermined winner is chosen. In the first voting, the subjects did not receive any a priori information, while in the second voting, some a priori information was provided, i.e. the true, objective ranking of the musicians. What followed was another voting. It was initially assumed that the participants would manipulate their voting the same way as in the first voting. The results, however, were different. The obtained second ranking of musicians was closest to the true, objective ranking, thus proving that the manipulation effect was neutralised by the a priori positive information about the true, objective order.","PeriodicalId":357447,"journal":{"name":"Przegląd Statystyczny","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przegląd Statystyczny","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.59139/ps.2022.04.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to present the results of experiments relating to voting methods based on the bounded rationality theory. The research demonstrated that a positive nudge changes the voting results. The study focused on three methods of voting: the Borda Count method, the Condorcet winner method and the anti-manipulation method. In a laboratory experiment, the subjects were asked to select the best musician. They were to manipulate their voting so that a predetermined winner is chosen. In the first voting, the subjects did not receive any a priori information, while in the second voting, some a priori information was provided, i.e. the true, objective ranking of the musicians. What followed was another voting. It was initially assumed that the participants would manipulate their voting the same way as in the first voting. The results, however, were different. The obtained second ranking of musicians was closest to the true, objective ranking, thus proving that the manipulation effect was neutralised by the a priori positive information about the true, objective order.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
先验的正面信息对投票结果的影响
本文的目的是介绍基于有限理性理论的投票方法的实验结果。研究表明,积极的推动会改变投票结果。研究重点是三种投票方法:博尔达计数法、孔多塞赢家法和反操纵法。在一项实验室实验中,研究对象被要求选出最好的音乐家。他们要操纵投票,这样就会选出一个预定的获胜者。在第一次投票中,受试者没有获得任何先验信息,而在第二次投票中,受试者提供了一些先验信息,即音乐家的真实、客观的排名。接下来是另一场投票。最初假设参与者会像第一次投票一样操纵他们的投票。然而,结果却不同。获得的音乐家的第二排名最接近真实的、客观的排名,从而证明操纵效应被关于真实的、客观的顺序的先验积极信息所中和。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Impact of a priori positive information on the results of voting methods Comparison of the accuracy of forecasts bsed on neural networks before and after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic on the example of selected exchange rates Estimation of Yu and Meyer bivariate stochastic volatility model by iterated filtering Sample size in clinical trials – challenges and approaches Alternative investments during turbulent times comparison of dynamic relationship
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1