Judgment Aggregation Theory Can Entail New Social Choice Results

Francois Maniquet and Philippe Mongin

Working Papers from HAL

Abstract: Judgment (or logical) aggregation theory is logically more powerful than social choice theory and has been put to use to recover some classic results of this field. Whether it could also enrich it with genuinely new results is still controversial. To support a positive answer, we prove a social choice theorem by using the advanced nonbinary form of judgment aggregation theory developed by Dokow and Holzman (2010c). This application involves aggregating classifications (specifically assignments) instead of preferences, and this focus justifies shifting away from the binary framework of standard judgement aggregation theory to a more general one.

Keywords: Social choice; Judgment aggregation; Logical aggregation; Aggregation of classifications; Assignments; Nonbinary evaluations (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014-11-04
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
Working Paper: Judgment aggregation theory can entail new social choice results (2014)
Working Paper: Judgment Aggregation Theory Can Entail New Social Choice Results (2014)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-02018546

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().