Nonconvergent Electoral Equilibria under Scoring Rules: Beyond Plurality
نویسندگان
چکیده
We use Hotelling’s spatial model of competition to investigate the positiontaking behaviour of political candidates under a class of electoral systems known as scoring rules. In a scoring rule election, voters rank all the candidates running for office, following which the candidates are assigned points according to a vector of nonincreasing scores. Convergent Nash equilibria in which all candidates adopt the same policy were characterised by Cox [5]. Here, we investigate nonconvergent equilibria, where candidates adopt divergent policies. We identify a number of classes of scoring rules exhibiting a range of different equilibrium properties. For some of these, nonconvergent equilibria do not exist. For others, nonconvergent equilibria in which candidates cluster at positions spread across the issue space are observed. In particular, we prove that the class of convex rules does not have Nash equilibria (convergent or nonconvergent) with the exception of some derivatives of Borda rule. Finally, we examine the special cases of four-, fiveand sixcandidate elections. In the former two cases, we provide a complete characterisation of nonconvergent equilibria.
منابع مشابه
Electoral Competition under Best-Worst Voting Rules
We characterise multi-candidate pure-strategy equilibria in the Hotelling-Downs spatial election model for the class of best-worst voting rules, in which each voter is endowed with both a positive and a negative vote, i.e., each voter can vote in favour of one candidate and against another one. The weights attached to positive and negative votes in calculating a candidate's net score may be dif...
متن کاملComparison of Scoring Rules in Poisson Voting Games
Scoring rules are compared by the equilibria that they generate for simple elections with three candidates and voters drawn from large Poisson distributions. A calculus for comparing pivot probabilities in Poisson voting games is applied. For a symmetric Condorcet cycle, nonsymmetric discriminatory equilibria exist under best-rewarding scoring rules like plurality voting. A candidate who is uni...
متن کاملApproval voting and scoring rules with common values
We compare approval voting with other scoring rules for environments with common values and private information. For finite electorates, the best equilibrium under approval voting is superior to plurality rule or negative voting. For large electorates, if any scoring rule yields a sequence of equilibria that aggregates information, then approval voting must do so as well.
متن کاملDistrict magnitude , electoral formula , and the number of parties KENNETH
Duverger’s propositions concerning the psychological and mechanical consequences of electoral rules have previously been examined mainly through the lens of district magnitude, comparing the properties of single-member district plurality elections with those of multimember proportional representation elections. The empirical consequences of multimember plurality (MMP) rules, on the other hand, ...
متن کاملThe scoring rules in an endogenous election
Plurality rule, when applied to a fixed agenda setting, is mostly criticized from being capable of choosing an alternative considered as worst by a strict majority. In this paper we consider an endogenous agenda setting with no more than three alternatives. In those equilibria where the Condorcet winner enters the contest, we show, in direct contrast to the fixed agenda case, that Plurality rul...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- CoRR
دوره abs/1301.0152 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2011