Explaining Positional Voting Paradoxes: The Simple Case

Donald G. Saari

No 1179, Discussion Papers from Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science

Abstract: A theory is developed to explain all possible (single profile) positional voting paradoxes. This includes all pairwise voting cycles, problems with agendas, conflict between the Borda and Condorcet winners, and differences among positional outcomes (such as the plurality and antiplurality methods). I show how to construct profiles to illustrate all of these paradoxes. Among the new conclusions contradicting accepted belief is that rather than being a standard for the field, the Condorcet winner has serious flaws. This paper discusses three candidates; the companion paper [25] handles n is greater to or equal to 3 candidates.

Date: 1997-01
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/research/math/papers/1179.pdf main text (application/pdf)

Related works:
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:nwu:cmsems:1179

Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Papers from Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science, Northwestern University, 580 Jacobs Center, 2001 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-2014. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Fran Walker ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).