Anchor-proofness in Voting with Ranked Ballots

Federico Fioravanti; Zoi Terzopoulou

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.10316

Anchor-proofness in Voting with Ranked Ballots

Federico Fioravanti·Zoi Terzopoulou

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

When voters evaluate alternatives sequentially, an anchoring bias makes their ballots depend on the order in which alternatives are presented. For approval ballots, no non-constant voting rule is robust to this dependence. We show that ranked ballots change the picture sharply: a rank-based rule is robust to the presentation order if and only if it is tops-only. Robustness to anchoring is thus available, but only at the price of ignoring everything a voter reports beyond her favourite alternative.

Explore related subjects

econ.TH

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Federico Fioravanti, Zoi Terzopoulou. 2026-10-07. Anchor-proofness in Voting with Ranked Ballots. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.10316

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Learning about informativeness

We study whether individuals can learn the informativeness of their information technology through social learning. As in the classic sequential social learning model, rational agents arrive in order and make decisions based on the past actions of others and their private signals. There is uncertainty regarding the informativeness of the common signal-generating process. We show that in this setting asymptotic learning about informativeness is not guaranteed and depends crucially on the relative tail distributions of private beliefs induced by uninformative and informative signals. We identify the phenomenon of perpetual disagreement as the cause of learning and characterize learning in the canonical Gaussian environment.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

Regulating a Monopolist through Capacity Control

We study monopoly regulation when capacity is contractible but subsequent output is not. A firm privately observes its production cost before installing costly capacity and then choosing output, while the regulator cannot use transfers. We provide sufficient conditions under which a single capacity floor implements an optimal mechanism with full participation. The floor raises output by changing investment while leaving utilization to the firm after installation costs are sunk. Under additional conditions, the allocation has three regions: laissez-faire, full utilization of the floor, and underutilization. High-cost types knowingly install capacity they will not fully use, yet produce more than under laissez-faire. This physical waste is a necessary evil of optimal regulation that expands service. We also show that underutilization can persist in optimal regulation with capacity-contingent subsidies or a common entry fee.

econ.TH↗

arXiv2026

Decision Noise in Threshold Selection

Can noisier threshold selection produce a group with higher mean true value? We answer this question by varying the scale of a fixed assessment error. Holding the selection rate fixed, less noise yields a first-order stochastically dominant distribution of selected values. At a fixed threshold, however, more noise can raise the selected mean even as selection loss, which weights selection mistakes by the distance of true value from the threshold, increases. Under joint Gaussianity, we characterize when the selected mean rises or falls with noise. In treatment selection, noise alone can generate subgroup differences in participants' average gains despite identical population gain distributions.

econ.TH↗