社会压力解释道德投票:对社会科学科学努力的方法论贡献

David Jimenez-Gomez
{"title":"社会压力解释道德投票:对社会科学科学努力的方法论贡献","authors":"David Jimenez-Gomez","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3291484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Models of ethical voting, in which individuals derive intrinsic utility from “doing their part�? by voting in elections, have been proposed as an explanation for the “voting paradox�? (why people vote if the probability of being pivotal is negligible). I show that the set of equilibria of the ethical voting model of Feddersen and Sandroni (2006) is identical to that of a model of social pressure in which only a negligible fraction of individuals are ethical. This has the crucial methodological implication that if people actually vote out of social pressure (as the empirical evidence suggests), then the ethical voting model cannot be falsified: even if the model is false, it will be consistent with any empirical evidence.","PeriodicalId":226815,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Pressure Explains Ethical Voting: A Methodological Contribution to the Scientific Endeavor in the Social Sciences\",\"authors\":\"David Jimenez-Gomez\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3291484\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Models of ethical voting, in which individuals derive intrinsic utility from “doing their part�? by voting in elections, have been proposed as an explanation for the “voting paradox�? (why people vote if the probability of being pivotal is negligible). I show that the set of equilibria of the ethical voting model of Feddersen and Sandroni (2006) is identical to that of a model of social pressure in which only a negligible fraction of individuals are ethical. This has the crucial methodological implication that if people actually vote out of social pressure (as the empirical evidence suggests), then the ethical voting model cannot be falsified: even if the model is false, it will be consistent with any empirical evidence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":226815,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3291484\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Methodology of Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3291484","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

道德投票模式,即个人从“尽自己的一份力”中获得内在效用?通过在选举中投票,被认为是对“投票悖论”的一种解释。(如果成为关键人物的可能性可以忽略不计,为什么人们会投票)。我展示了Feddersen和Sandroni(2006)的道德投票模型的均衡集与社会压力模型的均衡集是相同的,其中只有可忽略不计的一小部分个人是道德的。这有一个重要的方法论含义,即如果人们实际上是出于社会压力而投票(正如经验证据所表明的那样),那么道德投票模型就不能被证伪:即使模型是假的,它也会与任何经验证据相一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Social Pressure Explains Ethical Voting: A Methodological Contribution to the Scientific Endeavor in the Social Sciences
Models of ethical voting, in which individuals derive intrinsic utility from “doing their part�? by voting in elections, have been proposed as an explanation for the “voting paradox�? (why people vote if the probability of being pivotal is negligible). I show that the set of equilibria of the ethical voting model of Feddersen and Sandroni (2006) is identical to that of a model of social pressure in which only a negligible fraction of individuals are ethical. This has the crucial methodological implication that if people actually vote out of social pressure (as the empirical evidence suggests), then the ethical voting model cannot be falsified: even if the model is false, it will be consistent with any empirical evidence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
"The Eyes and Ears of the Agricultural Markets": A History of Information in Interwar Agricultural Economics Deepening and Widening Social Identity Analysis in Economics In Search of Santa Claus: Samuelson, Stigler, and Coase Theorem Worlds Reports from China: Joan Robinson as Observer and Travel Writer, 1953-78 Introduction to a Symposium on Carl Menger on the Centenary of his Death
×
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