Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The probability of casting a decisive vote: The effects of a caucus

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study the effects of caucus formation upon a voting process with the aid of a Pólya-Eggenberger probability model. The model contains a parameter interpretable as cohesiveness between voters in a voting body. We examine relationships among members' voting power, satisfaction, and group cohesiveness. We also explore the likelihood of a distortion of opinion resulting from the caucus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • S. Berg (1986). A note on power, satisfaction and group cohesiveness in a voting body. European Journal of Political Economy 2: 223–233

    Google Scholar 

  • S.J. Brams (1972). A cost/benefit analysis of coalition formation in voting bodies. In R.G. Niemi and H.F. Wiesberg (Eds.), Probability models of collective decision making, 101–124. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • G. Chamberlain and Rothschild, M. (1981). A note on the probability of casting a decisive vote. Journal of Economic Theory 25: 152–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • P. Dubey and Shapley, L.S. (1979). Mathematical properties of the Banzhaf power index. Mathematical Operations Research 4: 99–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • P.C. Fishburn and Gehrlein, W.V. (1984). Powers of subgroups in voting bodies. Social Choice and Welfare 1: 85–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • P.C. Fishburn and Gehrlein, W.V. (1985). The power of a cohesive subgroup within a voting body. Social Choice and Welfare 2: 197–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • P.C. Fishburn and Gehrlein, W.V. (1986). Division of power in legislatures with two cohesive subgroups. Social Choice and Welfare 3: 119–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Margolis (1977). Probability of a tie election. Public Choice 31: 135–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • L.S. Penrose (1946). The elementary statistics of majority voting. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 109: 53–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • D. Rae (1969). Decision rules and individual values in constitutional choice. American Political Science Review 63: 40–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Record (1983). The military reform caucus. Washington Quarterly 6: 125–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • P.D. Straffin Jr., Davis, M.D. and Brams, S.J. (1981). Power and satisfaction in an ideologically divided voting body. In M.J. Holler (Ed.), Power, voting, and voting power, 239–256. Würzburg: Physica Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • T.N. Tideman (1985). Remorse, elation, and the paradox of voting. Public Choice 46: 103–106.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Statistics, University of Lund, Box 7008, S-220 07, Lund

    Sven Berg

Authors
  1. Sven Berg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The author is grateful for financial support from the Swedish Council for Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berg, S. The probability of casting a decisive vote: The effects of a caucus. Public Choice 64, 73–92 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00125918

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00125918

Keywords

Search

Navigation