Difference between revisions of "Size of Committees Under Outside Influence"

DETAILS
[+/-]

Widgets

Widgets<bs-widget-edit>

Wanted pages
Who is online?
From SNUWIKI
Jump to: navigation, search
(Saptarshi P. Ghosh, Peter Postl, Jaideep Roy)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
===='''Working paper #SNUECON-WP2015-001'''====
 
===='''Working paper #SNUECON-WP2015-001'''====
 
===='''Saptarshi P. Ghosh, Peter Postl, Jaideep Roy'''====
 
===='''Saptarshi P. Ghosh, Peter Postl, Jaideep Roy'''====
'''<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Abstract</span>: '''The paper studies the impact of biased influence on the returns from increasing the sizeof a committee. We show that when the chance of preference misalignment between sourceof influence and voters is low, committee size is irrelevant and a small committee with theminimum number of just three voters generates the same probability of correct decisionmakingas any larger electorate. On the other hand, in settings with a high chance ofpreference misalignment, the smallest committee size needed to maximize this probabilityincreases with the precision of voters private signals.
+
'''<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Abstract</span>: '''The paper studies the impact of biased influence on the returns from increasing the sizeof a committee. We show that when the chance of preference misalignment between source of influence and voters is low, committee size is irrelevant and a small committee with the minimum number of just three voters generates the same probability of correct decision making as any larger electorate. On the other hand, in settings with a high chance of preference misalignment, the smallest committee size needed to maximize this probability increases with the precision of voters private signals.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
[index.php?action=ajax&title=-&rs=SecureFileStore::getFile&f=/9/91/Econ_SNU_WP1.pdf Download File]

Revision as of 04:02, 28 November 2015

Working paper #SNUECON-WP2015-001

Saptarshi P. Ghosh, Peter Postl, Jaideep Roy

AbstractThe paper studies the impact of biased influence on the returns from increasing the sizeof a committee. We show that when the chance of preference misalignment between source of influence and voters is low, committee size is irrelevant and a small committee with the minimum number of just three voters generates the same probability of correct decision making as any larger electorate. On the other hand, in settings with a high chance of preference misalignment, the smallest committee size needed to maximize this probability increases with the precision of voters private signals.


[index.php?action=ajax&title=-&rs=SecureFileStore::getFile&f=/9/91/Econ_SNU_WP1.pdf Download File]

Author