The McKelvey-Schofield chaos theorem is a result in social choice theory stating that when political preferences are defined over a policy space with more than one dimension, decisions made by majority rule become unstable. In most such settings there's no Condorcet winner, and any outcome can be reached from any starting point through some sequence of votes, so the order in which options are put to a vote can be used to steer the process toward almost any result. Richard McKelvey proved an early version of the theorem in 1976 for preferences based on Euclidean distance, Norman Schofield proved a further version in 1978 for differentiable preferences, and the result is often read as showing that Arrow's impossibility theorem keeps binding once preferences are allowed more than one dimension, unlike the single-dimensional case covered by the median voter theorem.
Facts
StatementIf preferences are defined over a multidimensional policy space, then choosing policies by majority rule is unstable: there is in most cases no Condorcet winner, and any policy can be enacted through a sequence of votes regardless of the original policy. 1 Classification
Statement Form Connections
Has Statement Form
In Branch
Source McKelvey-Schofield chaos theorem, Wikipedia
Sources
1. McKelvey-Schofield chaos theorem, Wikipedia
Lead paragraph, second and third sentences
It states that if preferences are defined over a multidimensional policy space, then choosing policies using majority rule is unstable. There will in most cases be no Condorcet winner and any policy can be enacted through a sequence of votes, regardless of the original policy.
Second paragraph, second sentence
A version of the theorem was first proved by Richard McKelvey in 1976, for preferences based on Euclidean distances in R^n.
In Branch: Game Theory, Lead
The McKelvey-Schofield chaos theorem is a result in social choice theory.
In Group: Social Choice and Voting Theory, Lead paragraph
The McKelvey-Schofield chaos theorem is a result in social choice theory.
View the SourceReader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.