Skip to main content
Log in

Homogeneity, independence, and power indices

  • Articles
  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

References

  • Allingham, M. G., “Economic Power and the Values of Games,”Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, 35 (1975), 293–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banzhaf, J. F., “Weighted Voting Doesn't Work: A Mathematical Analysis,”Rutgers Law Review, 19 (1965), 317–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banzhaf, J. F., “One Man, 3.312 Votes: A Mathematical Analysis of the Electoral College,”Villanova Law Review, 13 (1968), 304–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brams, S. J.,Game Theory and Politics. New York: Free Press, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canada,Constitutional Conference Proceedings, Victoria, B.C. June 14, 1971. Ottawa: Information Canada, 1971.

  • Dubey, P., “Some Results on Values of Finite and Infinite Games,” Technical Report, Center for Applied Mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. E., “An Analysis of Weighed Voting as Used in Reappointment of County Governments in New York State,”Albany Law Review, 34 (1969) 1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, W. F., “Measuring Power in Weighted Voting Systems,” Technical Report No. 227, Department of Opwerations Research, Cornell University, Ithaca, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, I. and Shapley, L. S., “The A Priori Voting Strength of the Electoral College,” RM3158, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, S., “Citizen Voting Power under the Electoral College: A Stochastic Model based on State Voting Patterns,” to appear inSIAM Jour. Applied Math.

  • Miller, D. R., “A Shapley Value Analysis of the Proposed Canadian Constitutional Amendment Scheme,”Canadian Journal of Political Science 6 (1973), 140–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, G., “Multilinear Extensions of Games,”Management Science, Series A, 18 (1972), P64-P79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, G., “Evaluation of a Presidential Election Game,”American Political Science Review 69 (1975), 947–953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W. H. and Ordeshook, P.,An Introduction to Positive Political Theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riker, W. H. and Shapley, L. S., “Weighted Voting: A Mathematical Analysis for Instrumental Judgement,” in Pennock and Chapman, eds.,Representation: Nomos X. New York: Atherton Press, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, N. Z. and Shapley, L. S., “Values of Large Games I: A Limit Theorem,” RM2648, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapley, L. S., “Simple Games: An Outline of the Descriptive Theory,”Behavioral Science, 7 (1962), 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapley, L. S. and Shubik, M., “A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System,”American Political Science Review 48 (1954), 787–792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straffin, P.D., “Power Indices in Politics,” Modules in Applied Mathematics, 334 Upson Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I am grateful to William Lucas and the Department of Operations Research at Cornell University, where this work was done. Many of my ideas on this subject were clarified in discussions with David Heath of that department.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Straffin, P.D. Homogeneity, independence, and power indices. Public Choice 30, 107–118 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01718820

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01718820

Keywords

Navigation