多数决定原则的制度修改

W. Bottom, L. Handlin, Ronald R. King, G. Miller
{"title":"多数决定原则的制度修改","authors":"W. Bottom, L. Handlin, Ronald R. King, G. Miller","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.317762","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social, economic, and organizational development require a degree of stable policy making. The instability of group decision making under majority rule has preoccupied social theorists since Condorcet in the late 18th century. In theory, subtle institutional modifications to pure majority rule may be sufficient to induce stability. This paper reviews experimental evidence regarding these stability inducing modifications. The experiments examine the impact of agenda control, super-majority voting requirements, veto powers, and bicameralism on group decision making.","PeriodicalId":131091,"journal":{"name":"Negotiation Applications","volume":"13 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Institutional Modifications of Majority Rule\",\"authors\":\"W. Bottom, L. Handlin, Ronald R. King, G. Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.317762\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Social, economic, and organizational development require a degree of stable policy making. The instability of group decision making under majority rule has preoccupied social theorists since Condorcet in the late 18th century. In theory, subtle institutional modifications to pure majority rule may be sufficient to induce stability. This paper reviews experimental evidence regarding these stability inducing modifications. The experiments examine the impact of agenda control, super-majority voting requirements, veto powers, and bicameralism on group decision making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":131091,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Negotiation Applications\",\"volume\":\"13 2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Negotiation Applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.317762\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Negotiation Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.317762","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

社会、经济和组织的发展需要一定程度的稳定的政策制定。自18世纪末孔多塞以来,多数决定原则下群体决策的不稳定性一直困扰着社会理论家。理论上,对纯粹的多数决定原则进行细微的制度修改,可能就足以带来稳定。本文综述了这些诱导稳定性修饰的实验证据。实验考察了议程控制、超级多数投票要求、否决权和两院制对群体决策的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Institutional Modifications of Majority Rule
Social, economic, and organizational development require a degree of stable policy making. The instability of group decision making under majority rule has preoccupied social theorists since Condorcet in the late 18th century. In theory, subtle institutional modifications to pure majority rule may be sufficient to induce stability. This paper reviews experimental evidence regarding these stability inducing modifications. The experiments examine the impact of agenda control, super-majority voting requirements, veto powers, and bicameralism on group decision making.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信