Skip to main content
Log in

Manipulability in matching markets: conflict and coincidence of interests

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Choice and Welfare Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We study comparative statics of manipulations by women in the men-proposing deferred acceptance mechanism in the two-sided one-to-one marriage market. We prove that if a group of women weakly successfully manipulates or employs truncation strategies, then all other women weakly benefit and all men are weakly harmed. We show that these results do not appropriately generalize to the many-to-one college admissions model.

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

References

  • Crawford VP (1991) Comparative statics in matching markets. J Econ Theory 54(1): 389–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubins LE, Freedman DA (1981) Machiavelli and the Gale-Shapley algorithm. American Mathematical Monthly 88(7): 485–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gale D, Shapley LS (1962) College admissions and the stability of marriage. Am Math Monthly 69(1): 9–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knuth DE (1976) Mariages stables. Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal, Montréal

    Google Scholar 

  • Kojima F, Pathak PA (2009) Incentives and stability in large two-sided matching markets. Am Econ Rev 99(3): 608–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma J (2010) The Singleton core in the college admissions problem and its application to the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP). Games Econ Behav 69(1): 150–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongell S, Roth AE (1991) Sorority rush as a two-sided matching mechanism. Am Econ Rev 81(3): 441–464

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE (1982) The economics of matching: stability and incentives. Math Oper Res 7(4): 617–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE (1984a) Stability and polarization of interests in job matching. Econometrica 52(1): 47–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE (1984b) Mispresentation and stability in the marriage problem. J Econ Theory 34(2): 383–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE (1985a) The college admission problem is not equivalent to the marriage problem. J Econ Theory 36(2): 277–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE (1985b) Conflict and coincidence of interest in job matching: some new results and open questions. Math Oper Res 10(3): 379–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE (2008) Deferred acceptance algorithms: history, theory, practice, and open questions. Int J Game Theory 36(3): 537–569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE., Sotomayor MAO (1989) The college admissions problem revisited. Econometrica 57(3): 559–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE, Sotomayor MAO (1990) Two-sided matching: a study in game-theoretic modeling and analysis, Econometric Society Monograph Series. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE, Vande Vate JH (1991) Incentives in two-sided matching with random stable mechanisms. Econ Theory 1(1): 31–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Flip Klijn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ashlagi, I., Klijn, F. Manipulability in matching markets: conflict and coincidence of interests. Soc Choice Welf 39, 23–33 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0549-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0549-y

Keywords

Navigation