One-dimensionality and stability in legislative voting

3Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The widespread use in legislative studies of the one-dimensional model and its median-stability consequence raises a question: Do stability and one-dimensionality rest on evidence drawn from observed votes? They do not and cannot. I prove that every possible legislative history is compatible with a transitive majority preference (hence stability), and except in very special circumstances with a cyclic majority preference (hence instability) as well: observed votes can never refute and almost never confirm stability. One-dimensionality fares worse: any legislative history is compatible with the one-dimensional model if it includes no two votes with overlapping pairs of alternatives, but otherwise, I show, it is almost certainly incompatible with the model, even in those rare cases that ensure transitivity. Voting evidence aside, the one-dimensional model is unduly restrictive, and arguments in its defense do not survive scrutiny. © 2010 The Author(s).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schwartz, T. (2011). One-dimensionality and stability in legislative voting. Public Choice, 148(1–2), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-010-9652-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free