Choosing an electoral rule: Values and self-interest in the lab

We study the choice of multi-person bargaining protocols in the context of politics. In politics, citizens are increasingly involved in the design of democratic rules, for instance via referendums. If they support the rule that best serves their self-interest, the outcome inevitably advantages the largest group. In this paper, we challenge this pessimistic view with an original lab experiment, in which 252 subjects participated. In the first stage, these subjects experience elections under plurality and approval voting. In the second stage, they decide which rule they want to use for extra elections. We find that egalitarian values that subjects hold outside of the lab shape their choice of electoral rule in the second stage when a rule led to a fairer distribution of payoffs compared to the other one in the first stage. The implication is that people have consistent ‘value-driven preferences’ for decision rules.     

The bomb-crater effect of tax audits: Beyond the misperception of chance

The experimental literature has identified the Bomb Crater Effect (BoCE), i.e., the fact that tax compliance drops immediately after a taxpayer is audited. From a theoretical perspective, BoCE has been explained either by the misperception of chance, also known as the gambler’s fallacy, or by the loss repair effect. The aim of this paper is to look more closely at the former. We run a laboratory experiment in which the information set is relatively rich but the implementation of the Bayesian updating process is fairly simple. By doing so, we are able to elicit a range of consistent but heterogeneous probability beliefs and to distinguish between Bayesian and non-Bayesian subjects. We obtain two major results concerning Bayesian subjects. First, they exhibit a strong and robust short-run BoCE. Second, they are seemingly not affected by the audits of other taxpayers in their compliance decision. These results are robust to different definitions of Bayesianity as well as to different specifications and conflict with the evidence that Bayesian agents correctly perceive the chance of being audited. In turn, these findings suggest that the existing explanations of the BoCE are not satisfactory and that alternative theories are needed.     

Software and Method: Reflections on Teaching and Using QSR NVivo in Doctoral Research

This reflective paper draws on a range of experiences developed over the last 11 years regarding the way in which qualitative data analysis (QDA) software (QSR NUD?IST and NVivo) is taught and used within doctoral research. The existing separation of qualitative methods training from QDA software training can result in disconnected technical and methodological learning curves. This can cause a number of problems for doctoral students because a ‘methods revolution’ is being experienced and current students are not necessarily exposed to the support they require via the methods literature, their postgraduate training programme or their supervisor. Three key influences on the use of QDA software are discussed within the context of teaching and learning QSR NVivo: the increased popularity of QDA software amongst those from traditionally positivistic backgrounds; the promise of improved levels of transparency; and the reliance upon the free tutorials, which are distributed with the software, to learn qualitative research methods as well as software processes. Implications for doctoral students, supervisors and examiners are discussed.     

Borda’s Paradox with weighted scoring rules

Representations are obtained for the probabilities that a Strict Borda Paradox and a Strong Borda Paradox are observed for large electorates with three candidates under the standard assumptions of Impartial Culture and Impartial Anonymous Culture. These representations are obtained for general weighted scoring rules (WSRs), and the probabilities are found to be maximized for voting rules like plurality rule and negative plurality rule. It is found that these paradox probabilities are not reduced for every scoring rule with the introduction of some degree of dependence among voters’ preferences with IAC. It is concluded that actual observances of a Strict Borda Paradox should be extremely rare, and that while observances of a Strong Borda Paradox should also be rare, they might occasionally be witnessed.     

On the manipulability of approval voting and related scoring rules

We characterize all preference profiles at which the approval (voting) rule is manipulable, under three extensions of preferences to sets of candidates: by comparison of worst candidates, best candidates, or by comparison based on stochastic dominance. We perform a similar exercise for k-approval rules, where voters approve of a fixed number k of candidates. These results can be used to compare (k-)approval rules with respect to their manipulability. Analytical results are obtained for the case of two voters, specifically, the values of k for which the k-approval rule is minimally manipulable—has the smallest number of manipulable preference profiles—under the various preference extensions are determined. For the number of voters going to infinity, an asymptotic result is that the k-approval rule with k around half the number of candidates is minimally manipulable among all scoring rules. Further results are obtained by simulation and indicate that k-approval rules may improve on the approval rule as far as manipulability is concerned.     

BELIEFS ABOUT OTHER-REGARDING PREFERENCES IN A SEQUENTIAL PUBLIC GOODS GAME

Experimental evidence is used to deduce players' beliefs about their opponents' concern for others. The experiment is a sequential public good provision game with a provision point and two different refund rules. A theory is constructed to show how early contributions should change with the refund rule depending on the first mover's beliefs about subsequent players' other-regarding preferences. The evidence rejects the hypothesis that early players believe that their opponents are inequality averse and also rejects the hypothesis that early players are concerned with security. The evidence is consistent with beliefs in spite, reciprocity, or a concern for security. (JEL H41 , C90 , D63 , D64 )     

Spirituality in Latino families of children with autism spectrum disorder

Research on Latino parents of children with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) suggests that these parents often use spirituality to conceptualize and to cope with their child’s diagnosis. However, there are no studies that examine religion among Latino parents of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The current study explores how Latino parents of children with ASD incorporate spirituality into their conceptualizations of their child’s disability. In the current study, 34 Latina mothers of children with ASD were interviewed about autism-related services, family characteristics, and cultural beliefs including spiritual beliefs. Thematic analysis of the transcribed interview data relating to spiritual beliefs was conducted for the present study. Most mothers endorsed beliefs that their child with a disability was a message from God. Within this theme, mothers reported beliefs that their child was a blessing from God, a test from God, a sign from God or that the parent was special. Other parents believed that having a child with a disability was not an act of God, but related to biomedical factors, and another group of parents was unsure about the spiritual meaning of their child with a disability. Lastly, some mothers reported that their larger cultural group believed that having a child with a disability was a punishment or a negative sign from God but they markedly rejected that conception. These findings suggest that providers working with Latino families of children with ASD should acknowledge the importance of spirituality for these families.     

Measuring expectations of inflation: Effects of survey mode,wording, and opportunities to revise

Several national surveys aim to elicit consumers’ inflation expectations. Median expectations tend to track objective inflation estimates over time, although responses display large dispersion. Medians also tend to differ between surveys, possibly reflecting survey design differences. Using a nationally representative Dutch sample, we evaluate the importance of three survey design features in explaining observed differences: mode (face-to-face vs. web), question wording (‘prices in general’ vs. ‘inflation’), and the explicit opportunity to revise responses. We examine effects on item non-responses, revisions, reported inflation expectations and their deviation from the CPI inflation rate. We discuss implications of our findings for survey design.     

Using QSR‐NVivo to facilitate the development of a grounded theory project: an account of a worked example

This paper demonstrates how the software package QSR‐NVivo can be used to faciitate a grounded theory approach. Recent research evidence has questioned the methodological quality of many studies that claim to utilise grounded theory. This paper argues that qualitative data analysis software can be used to encourage good quality grounded theory research by facilitating many of the key processes and characteristics associated with this approach. To achieve this, the paper identifies a number of grounded theory characteristics, common to all revisions of the methodology. It then describes the development of a recent study, which examined how people successfully maintain long‐term physical activity behaviour change. The purpose of this is to demonstrate how different functions of QSR‐NVivo may be used in conjunction with the key grounded theory characteristics. In summary, QSR‐NVivo is a powerful tool that, if used appropriately, can facilitate many aspects of the grounded theory process from the design and early sampling procedures, through to the analysis of data, theoretical development and presentation of findings.     

CULTURAL DIVERSITY, DISCRIMINATION, AND ECONOMIC OUTCOMES: AN EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS

Does cultural diversity affect economic outcomes? We develop an experimental framework that complements ongoing research on this question. We vary the ethnic mix of bargaining sessions to study intercultural interactions among members of U.S. Hispanic and Navajo cultures. We control for demographic differences in our subject pools and elicit beliefs directly in order to differentiate between statistical discrimination and preference‐based discrimination. Hispanic and Navajo subjects behave differently, and their behavior is affected by the ethnic composition of the experimental session. Our experimental framework can shed light on economic behavior and outcomes in societies of mixed ethnicity, race, and religion. (JEL C78, C90, Z10)     

Scoring rules on dichotomous preferences

In this paper, we study individual incentives to report preferences truthfully for the special case when individuals have dichotomous preferences on the set of alternatives and preferences are aggregated in form of scoring rules. In particular, we show that (a) the Borda Count coincides with Approval Voting, (b) the Borda Count is the only strategy-proof scoring rule, and (c) if the size of the electorate is greater than three, then the dichotomous preference domain is the unique maximal rich domain under which the Borda Count is strategy-proof. I thank Jordi Massó for his supervision and his never-ending encouragement. Miguel-ángel Ballester showed me how to improve on earlier drafts of the paper. Salvador Barberà, Carmen Bevía, Bhaskar Dutta, Lars Ehlers, Alejandro Neme, Shmuel Nitzan and Yves Sprumont helped me a lot with their comments. All remaining errors are mine. This research was undertaken with support from the fellowship 2001FI 00451 of the Generalitat de Catalunya and from the research grant BEC2002-02130 of the Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología of Spain while I have been a graduate student at Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.     

Scoring rule voting games and dominance solvability

This article studies the dominance solvability (by iterated deletion of weakly dominated strategies) of general scoring rule voting games when there are three alternatives. The scoring rules we study include Plurality rule, Approval voting, Borda rule, and Relative Utilitarianism. We provide sufficient conditions for dominance solvability of general scoring rule voting games. The sufficient conditions that we provide for dominance solvability are in terms of one statistic of the game: sufficient agreement on the best alternative or on the worst alternative. We also show that the solutions coincide with the set of Condorcet Winners whenever the sufficient conditions for dominance solvability are satisfied. Approval Voting performs the best in terms of our criteria.     

Scoring rules for judgment aggregation

This paper introduces a new class of judgment aggregation rules, to be called ‘scoring rules’ after their famous counterparts in preference aggregation theory. A scoring rule generates the collective judgment set which reaches the highest total ‘score’ across the individuals, subject to the judgment set having to be rational. Depending on how we define ‘scores’, we obtain several (old and new) solutions to the judgment aggregation problem, such as distance-based aggregation, premise- and conclusion-based aggregation, truth-tracking rules, and a generalization of the Borda rule to judgment aggregation theory. Scoring rules are shown to generalize the classical scoring rules of preference aggregation theory.     

Minimal monotonic extensions of scoring rules

Noting the existence of social choice problems over which no scoring rule is Maskin monotonic, we characterize minimal monotonic extensions of scoring rules. We show that the minimal monotonic extension of any scoring rule has a lower and upper bound, which can be expressed in terms of alternatives with scores exceeding a certain critical score. In fact, the minimal monotonic extension of a scoring rule coincides with its lower bound if and only if the scoring rule satisfies a certain weak monotonicity condition (such as the Borda and antiplurality rule). On the other hand, the minimal monotonic extension of a scoring rule approaches its upper bound as its degree of violating weak monotonicity increases, an extreme case of which is the plurality rule with a minimal monotonic extension reaching its upper bound.

---

Axiomatic derivation of scoring rules without the ordering assumption

Earlier derivations of scoring rules, by Smith (1973) and Young (1975), assumed that a voter can express only a rank ordering of the alternatives on his or her ballot. This paper shows that scoring rules can be derived without this ordering assumption. It is shown that a voting rule must be a scoring rule if it satisfies three basic axioms: reinforcement, overwhelming majorities, and neutrality. Other range and nonreversal axioms are also discussed.     

Validation of interaction-based egocentric elicitation using ecological momentary assessment with young adults currently or formerly homeless

IntroductionSocial network changes are common as individuals transition from homeless to Supportive Housing. Egocentric approaches to elicit network members have been utilized with young adults experiencing homelessness to better understand such socio-environmental contexts; however, such approaches are subject to recall bias. Momentary measurements of one’s social network via Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) can support in understanding the accuracy of egocentric elicitation methods.ObjectiveTo examine who is elicited using an interaction-based approach in egocentric social network analysis among currently homeless and formerly homeless young adults residing in Supportive Housing and explore which alters are reported in interactions and how often are they reported when egocentric network analysis is embedded in EMA.MethodsThe present study utilizes interaction-based elicitation embedded within Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) in two sub-samples: currently homeless young adults (n = 72) and formerly homeless young adults residing in Supportive Housing (n = 118).ResultsMost egos interacted with three of their top five alters, while only 8.9% interacted with all five. Conversely, only 2% of egos reported that they did not interact with any of their top five. Several differences in alter characteristics were identified by housing status. Alters indicated as being more supportive are elicited first and alters elicited first are interacted with the most.ConclusionsEMA findings suggest that a cross-sectional social network survey of top five alters will results in an ordered list, with the most important/frequent alter being named first and trend downward. Results have implications for future study design involving egocentric network analyses. Present findings indicate qualities of alters present and thus, offer plausible “best practices” when utilizing network elicitation methods, particularly interaction-based methods.     

Central tendency bias in belief elicitation

We conduct an experiment in which subjects participate in a first-price auction against an automaton that bids randomly in a given range. The subjects first place a bid in the auction. They are then given an incentivized elicitation of their beliefs of the opponent’s bid. Despite having been told that the bid of the opponent is drawn from a uniform distribution, we find that a majority of subjects report beliefs that have a peak in the interior of the range. This result is robust across seven different experimental treatments. While not expected at the outset, these single-peaked beliefs have precedence in the experimental psychology judgments literature. Our results suggest that an elicitation of probability beliefs can result in responses that are more concentrated than the objectively known or induced truth. We provide indicative evidence that such individual belief reports can be rationalized by well-defined subjective beliefs that differ from the objective truth. Our findings offer an explanation for the conservatism and overprecision biases in Bayesian updating. Finally, our findings suggest that probabilistic forecasts of uncertain events might have less variance than the actual events.     

Social cognitions about adult male victims of female sexual assault

Although men are far less likely than women to be victims of heterosexual assault, such cases have been reported with increasing frequency in recent years. We compared social judgments about male and female victims of heterosexual and homosexual rape and tested hypotheses concerning social cognitions that are assumed to underlie a male rape mythology. In a 2 × 2 × 2 design, 77 male and 89 female subjects made a series of judgments about a sexual assault case in which sex of victim and sex of assailants were manipulated. Consistent with the hypotheses, the male victim of sexual assault by females was judged more likely to have initiated or encouraged the sex acts, and more enjoyment and less stress were attributed to him. This pattern of results was more pronounced among male subjects. The results are discussed in relation to stereotypic beliefs concerning male sex roles, sexual motivation, and sexual functioning that are likely to affect the social cognitions of both observers and male victims of heterosexual assault.     

FOOLING MYSELF OR FOOLING OBSERVERS? AVOIDING SOCIAL PRESSURES BY MANIPULATING PERCEPTIONS OF DESERVINGNESS OF OTHERS

We present a novel experiment demonstrating strategies selfish individuals utilize to avoid social pressure to be altruistic. Subjects participate in a trust game, after which they have an opportunity to state their beliefs about their opponent's actions. Subsequently, subjects participate in a task designed to “reveal” their true beliefs. Subjects who initially made selfish choices falsely state their beliefs about their opponent's kindness. Their “revealed” beliefs were significantly more accurate, which exposed subjects' knowledge that their selfishness was unjustifiable by their opponent's behavior. The initial false statements complied with social norms, suggesting subjects' attempts to project a more favorable social image. (JEL C9, D03, D83)     

Exploring the transfer of self-efficacy: academic self-efficacy predicts exercise and nutrition self-efficacy / Una exploración de la transferencia de la autoeficacia: la autoeficacia académica predice la autoeficacia nutritiva y del ejercicio físico

In this research, we investigated the transfer of self-efficacy (SE) beliefs from one domain to another. Specifically, we explored whether academic SE beliefs might be able to predict exercise (Study 1) and nutrition (Study 2) SE. Additionally, to explore the underlying mechanisms, participants reported on domain confidence, perceived similarity and domain importance. Specifically, in Study 1, undergraduate students reported on their academic SE beliefs, confidence in the academic and exercise domains and their exercise SE beliefs (n = 50). In Study 2, participants reported on their academic SE beliefs, confidence in the academic and nutrition domains and their nutrition SE beliefs (n = 71). Moreover, in both studies, the perceived importance and the perceived similarity between domains were measured. Multiple regression analyses revealed that academic SE beliefs, academic confidence and exercise confidence were significant predictors of exercise SE beliefs (Study 1); for Study 2 nutrition SE was predicted by academic SE, academic confidence, nutrition confidence and nutrition importance diet. Additionally, we found a partial suppression effect in both studies: academic confidence strengthened the relationship between academic SE and exercise SE in Study 1, and between academic SE and nutrition SE in Study 2. Discussion focuses on the similarities and differences between the studies’ results and the implications for the literature.