Abstract
A stylized model of three parties choosing an amendment agenda and voting over three policy alternatives is analyzed. The analysis yields a classification of five types of voters: random, sincere, strategic, risk-averse, and EUS (expected utility sophisticated) proposed by Enelow (J. Polit. 43:1062-1089, 1981). Laboratory experiments suggest that the choice of agendas can be partially explained by the sincere voting model (26% of voters) and strategic voting model (47% of voters), even when players' preferences are common knowledge. Risk-aversion may explain choices of up to 56% of the voters. Finally, the EUS voting model explains up to 73% of the observed voting behavior.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 277-290 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Public Choice |
| Volume | 141 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Oct 2009 |
Keywords
- Amendment agenda
- Endogenous agenda
- Intransivity of collective preferences
- Strategic voting
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Endogenous choice of amendment agendas: Types of voters and experimental evidence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver