Equilibria of plurality voting: Lazy and truth-biased voters

14Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

We present a systematic study of Plurality elections with strategic voters who, in addition to having preferences over election winners, also have secondary preferences, governing their behavior when their vote cannot affect the election outcome. Specifically, we study two models that have been recently considered in the literature: lazy voters, who prefer to abstain when they are not pivotal, and truth-biased voters, who prefer to vote truthfully when they are not pivotal. For both lazy and truth-biased voters, we are interested in their behavior under different tie-breaking rules (lexicographic rule, random voter rule, random candidate rule). Two of these six combinations of secondary preferences and tie-breaking rules have been studied in prior work; for the remaining four, we characterize pure Nash equilibria (PNE) of the resulting strategic games and study the complexity of related computational problems. We then use these results to analyze the impact of different secondary preferences and tie-breaking rules on the election outcomes. Our results extend to settings where some of the voters are non-strategic.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Elkind, E., Markakis, E., Obraztsova, S., & Skowron, P. (2015). Equilibria of plurality voting: Lazy and truth-biased voters. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 9347, pp. 110–122). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48433-3_9

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