EconBase
← All papers

Assessment Voting in Large Electorates

Hans Gersbach, Akaki Mamageishvili, Oriol Tejada

arXiv 14 Dec 2017 · Econometrics · 2 citations (OpenAlex)

arXiv:1712.05470 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

We analyze Assessment Voting, a new two-round voting procedure that can be applied to binary decisions in democratic societies. In the first round, a randomly-selected number of citizens cast their vote on one of the two alternatives at hand, thereby irrevocably exercising their right to vote. In the second round, after the results of the first round have been published, the remaining citizens decide whether to vote for one alternative or to ab- stain. The votes from both rounds are aggregated, and the final outcome is obtained by applying the majority rule, with ties being broken by fair randomization. Within a costly voting framework, we show that large elec- torates will choose the preferred alternative of the majority with high prob- ability, and that average costs will be low. This result is in contrast with the literature on one-round voting, which predicts either higher voting costs (when voting is compulsory) or decisions that often do not represent the preferences of the majority (when voting is voluntary).

Citation extraction

21
references
38
in-text mentions
21
distinct cited
1
self-citations
7,974
main-text words

appendix boundary found by appendix_command · 55% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.

Most heavily cited references

The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.

ReferenceIntensityMentionsSectionsMain text
1Taylor, C. R. and Yildirim, H (2010) A unified analysis of rational voting with private values and group-specific costs1.00063100%
2Arzumanyan, M. and Polborn, M (2017) Costly voting with multiple candidates under plurality rule0.9507586%
3Taylor, C. R. and Yildirim, H (2010) Public information and electoral bias0.92843100%
4Börgers, T (2004) Costly voting0.64422100%
5Myerson, R (2000) Large Poisson games0.64422100%
6Krasa, S. and Polborn, M (2009) Is mandatory voting better than voluntary voting?0.64422100%
7Agranov, M., Goeree, J. K., Romero, J., and Yariv, L (2017) What makes voters turn out: The effects of polls and beliefs0.40511100%
8Battaglini, M (2005) Sequential voting with abstention0.40511100%
9Bhattacharya, S., Duffy, J., and Kim, S.-T (2014) Compulsory versus voluntary voting: An experimental study0.40511100%
10Campbell, C. M (1999) Large electorates and decisive minorities0.40511100%

Showing the top 10 of 21 scored citations.