Reliability of Information Aggregation with Regional Biases: A Note

Abstract

Is there a rationale for an electoral college system or do these voting systems always waste useful information? This paper studies this question in a setup in which voting is supposed to aggregate decentralized information about individual preferences for two candidates. Individual perceptions may be affected by regional information. When such regional information plays a major role, an electoral college system may be superior to simple majority voting.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Austen-Smith D., Banks J.S. (1996) Information aggregation, rationality, and the condorcet Jury theorem. American Political Science Review 90(1): 34–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Blair D.H. (1979) Electoral college reform and distribution of voting power. Public Choice 34(2): 201–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cebula R.J. (2001) The electoral college and voter participation: Evidence on two hypotheses. Atlantic Economic Journal 29: 304–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cebula R.J., Murphy D.R. (1980) The electoral college and voter participation rates. Public Choice 35(2): 185–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Condorcet, M. de (1785), Essai sur l’application de l’analyse a la probabilite des decisions rendues a la probabilite des viox. De L’imprimierie royale: Paris

  6. Doraszelski, U., Gerardi, D. and Squintani, F. (2003), Communication and voting with double-sided information, Contributions to Theoretical Economics 3(1), Article 6

  7. Feddersen T. J., Pesendorfer W. (1996), The swing voter’s curse. American Economic Review 86(3): 408–424

    Google Scholar 

  8. Feddersen T.J., Pesendorfer W. (1997) Voting behavior and information aggregation in elections with private information. Econometrica 65(5): 1029–1058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Feddersen T.J., Pesendorfer W. (1999a) Abstention in elections with asymmetric information and diverse preferences. American Political Science Review 93(2): 381–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Feddersen T.J., Pesendorfer W. (1999b), Election, information aggregation and strategic voting. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96: 10572–10574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gerardi, D. and Yariv, L. (2002), Deliberative Voting, Mimeo.

  12. Gerling K., Grüner H.P., Kiel A., Schulte E. (2003) Decision making in committees: A survey. European Journal of Political Economy 21: 563–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ladha K.K. (1992) The Condorcet Jury Theorem, free speech, and correlated votes. American Journal of Political Science 36: 617–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lizzeri A., Persico N. (2001) The provision of public goods under alternative electoral incentives. American Economic Review 91(1): 225–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mukhopadhaya K. (2003) Jury size and the free rider problem. The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization 19: 24–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Persico N. (2004) Committee design with endogenous information. Review of Economic Studies 71: 165–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Strumpf K.S., Phillippe J.R. Jr. (1999), Estimating presidential elections: The importance of state fixed effects and the role of national versus local information. Economics and Politics 11: 33–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Young H.P. (1988) Condorcet’s theory of voting. American Political Science Review 82(4): 1231–1244

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hans Peter Grüner.

Additional information

A previous version of this paper has appeared as CEPR Dp. No. 3371.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Behm, M., Grüner, H.P. Reliability of Information Aggregation with Regional Biases: A Note. Theory Decis 66, 355–371 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-007-9078-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • information aggregation
  • democracy
  • electoral college
  • popular vote

JEL Code Classification

  • D72