Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluative comparisons of distributions of a social variable: Ordering methods

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

A distribution of a social variable over a population assigns a level or value of the variable to each individual in the population. The present paper continues a study of methods of ordering distributions of a social variable that was begun in an earlier paper. The earlier paper addressed issues of meaningfulness of evaluative comparisons and then examined several fundamental criteria for social evaluation. The present paper focuses on a variety of methods of ordering distributions. It begins with additive extensions of a Pareto principle and then looks at a number of distributional dominance relations, all of which are based on individuals' preferences. Ordering methods that may be only marginally related to individuals' preferences are discussed in the latter part of the paper.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliography

  • ArrowK. J.: 1973, ‘Some Ordinalist-Utilitarian Notes on Rawls' Theory of Justice’, Journal of Philosophy 70, 245–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • AtkinsonA. B.: 1970, ‘On the Measurement of Inequality’, Journal of Economic Theory 2, 244–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • BalinskiM. L. and YoungH. P.: 1977, ‘Apportionment Schemes and the Quota Method’, American Mathematical Monthly 84, 450–455 & 542.

    Google Scholar 

  • BeachC. M.: 1977, ‘Cyclical Sensitivity of Aggregate Income Inequality’, Review of Economics and Statistics 59, 56–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • ChipmanJ. S.: 1971, ‘Consumption Theory Without Transitive Indifference’, in J. S.Chipman, L.Hurwicz, M. K.Richter and H. F.Sonnenschein (eds.), Preferences, Utility, and Demand, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • ChipmanJ. S.: 1974, ‘The Welfare Ranking of Pareto Distributions’, Journal of Economic Theory 9, 275–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • DaltonH.: 1920, ‘The Measurement of the Inequality of Incomes’, Economic Journal 30, 348–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • DasguptaP., SenA., and StarrettD.: 1973, ‘Notes on the Measurement of Inequality’, Journal of Economic Theory 6, 180–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • d'AspremontC. and GeversL.: 1977, ‘Equity and the Informational Basis of Collective Choice’, Review of Economic Studies 44, 199–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Debreu, G.: 1960, ‘Topological Methods in Cardinal Utility Theory’, Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences 1959, 16–26.

  • EltetöÖ. and FrigyesE.: 1968, ‘New Income Inequality Measures as Efficient Tools for Causal Analysis and Planning’, Econometrica 36, 383–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1964, Decision and Value Theory, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1970a, Utility Theory for Decision Making, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1970b, ‘Intransitive Indifference in Preference Theory: A Survey’, Operations Research 18, 207–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1974, ‘Lexicographic Orders, Utilities and Decision Rules: A Survey’, Management Science 20, 1442–1471.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1975, ‘Axioms for Lexicographic Preferences’, Review of Economic Studies 42, 415–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1976a, ‘Evaluative Comparisons of Distributions of a Social Variable: Basic Issues and Criteria’, Social Indicators Research, 3, 143–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1976b, ‘Cardinal Utility: An Interpretive Essay’, International Review of Economics and Business 23, 1102–1114.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1976c, ‘Continua of Stochastic Dominance Relations for Bounded Probability Distributions’, Journal of Mathematical Economics 3, 295–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • FishburnP. C.: 1978, ‘A Survey of Multiattribute/Multicriterion, Evaluation Theories’, in S.Zionts (ed.), Multiple Criteria Problem Solving, Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • GormanW. M.: 1968, ‘Symposium on Aggregation: The Structure of Utility Functions’, Review of Economic Studies 35, 367–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • HammondP. J.: 1976, ‘Why Ethical Measures of Inequality Need Interpersonal Comparisons’, Theory and Decision 7, 263–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • HochmanH. M. and RodgersJ. D.: 1969, ‘Pareto Optimal Redistribution’, American Economic Review 59, 542–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • KakwaniN. C.: 1977, ‘Applications of Lorenz Curves in Economic Analysis’, Econometrica 45 719–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • KolmS. Ch.: 1969, ‘The Optimal Production of Social Justice’, in Margolis and Guitton (eds.), Public Economics, Macmillan, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • KolmS. Ch.: 1976, ‘Unequal Equalities. I & II’, Journal of Economic Theory 12, 416–442; 13, 82-111.

    Google Scholar 

  • LuceR. D.: 1973, ‘Three Axiom Systems for Additive Semiordered Structures’, SIAM Journal an Applied Mathematics 25, 41–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • LuceR. D. and TukeyJ. W.: 1964, ‘Simultaneous Conjoint Measurement: A New Type of Fundamental Measurement’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1, 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmonK. R.: 1973, ‘An Overview of Multiple Objective Decision Making’, in J. L.Cochrane and M.Zeleny (eds.), Multiple Criteria Decision Making, University of South Carolina Press, Columbia, South Carolina.

    Google Scholar 

  • NewberyD.: 1970, ‘A Theorem on the Measurement of Inequality’, Journal of Economic Theory 2, 264–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • PaglinM.: 1975, ‘The Measurement and Trend of Inequality: A Basic Revision’, American Economic Review 65, 598–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • RawlsJ.: 1971, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • RawlsJ.: 1974, ‘Concepts of Distributional Equity: Some Reasons for the Maximin Criterion’, American Economic Review 64, 141–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • RothschildM. and StiglitzJ. E.: 1973, ‘Some Further Results on the Measurement of Inequality’, Journal of Economic Theory 6, 188–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • RoyB.: 1971, ‘Problems and Methods with Multiple Objective Functions’, Mathematical Programming 1, 239–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • SavageL. J.: 1972, 1954, The Foundations of Statistics, Dover Publications, New York; Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • SchutzR. R.: 1951, ‘On the Measurement of Income Inequality’, American Economic Review 41, 107–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • ScottD.: 1964, ‘Measurement Structures and Linear Inequalities’, Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1, 233–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • SenA. K.: 1970, Collective Choice and Social Welfare, Holden-Day, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • SenA.: 1974, ‘Informational Bases of Alternative Welfare Approaches’, Journal of Public Economics 3, 387–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • SenA.: 1976, ‘Welfare Inequalities and Rawlsian Axiomatics’, Theory and Decision 7, 243–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • SheshinskiE.: 1972, ‘Relation Between a Social Welfare Function and the Gini Index of Income Inequality’, Journal of Economic Theory 4, 98–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • SuppesP.: 1956, ‘The Role of Subjective Probability and Utility in Decision-Making’, Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 1954–1955, 5, 61–73.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fishburn, P.C. Evaluative comparisons of distributions of a social variable: Ordering methods. Soc Indic Res 6, 103–126 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00305439

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00305439

Keywords

Navigation