Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 33
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Dietrich, Franz 2016. Judgment aggregation and agenda manipulation. Games and Economic Behavior, Vol. 95, p. 113.

    Dietrich, Franz 2015. Aggregation theory and the relevance of some issues to others. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 160, p. 463.

    Jakimowicz, A. 2015. Path Dependence in Neoclassical Economic Growth Theory. Acta Physica Polonica A, Vol. 127, Issue. 3a, p. A-86.

    Lehtinen, Aki 2015. Strategic Voting and the Degree of Path-Dependence. Group Decision and Negotiation, Vol. 24, Issue. 1, p. 97.

    Pigozzi, Gabriella 2015. The Logic of Group Decisions: Judgment Aggregation. Journal of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 44, Issue. 6, p. 755.

    Dietrich, Franz 2014. Scoring rules for judgment aggregation. Social Choice and Welfare, Vol. 42, Issue. 4, p. 873.

    Grossi, Davide and Pigozzi, Gabriella 2014. Judgment Aggregation: A Primer. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, p. 1.

    Nehring, Klaus Pivato, Marcus and Puppe, Clemens 2014. The Condorcet set: Majority voting over interconnected propositions. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 151, p. 268.

    O'Madagain, Cathal 2014. CAN GROUPS HAVE CONCEPTS? SEMANTICS FOR COLLECTIVE INTENTIONS. Philosophical Issues, Vol. 24, Issue. 1, p. 347.

    Dietrich, Franz and List, Christian 2013. Propositionwise judgment aggregation: the general case. Social Choice and Welfare, Vol. 40, Issue. 4, p. 1067.

    Nehama, Ilan 2013. Approximately classic judgement aggregation. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 68, Issue. 1-3, p. 91.

    List, Christian 2012. The theory of judgment aggregation: an introductory review. Synthese, Vol. 187, Issue. 1, p. 179.

    List, Christian 2012. Philosophy of Economics.

    Mongin, Philippe 2012. The doctrinal paradox, the discursive dilemma, and logical aggregation theory. Theory and Decision, Vol. 73, Issue. 3, p. 315.

    O’Madagain, Cathal 2012. Group Agents: Persons, Mobs, or Zombies?. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, Vol. 20, Issue. 2, p. 271.

    List, Christian 2011. Group Communication and the Transformation of Judgments: An Impossibility Result*. Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol. 19, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    Dietrich, Franz 2010. The possibility of judgment aggregation on agendas with subjunctive implications. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 145, Issue. 2, p. 603.

    Hampsher-Monk, Iain and Hindmoor, Andrew 2010. Rational Choice and Interpretive Evidence: Caught between a Rock and a Hard Place?. Political Studies, Vol. 58, Issue. 1, p. 47.

    List, Christian and Polak, Ben 2010. Introduction to judgment aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 145, Issue. 2, p. 441.

    Nehring, Klaus and Puppe, Clemens 2010. Abstract Arrowian aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory, Vol. 145, Issue. 2, p. 467.


A Model of Path-Dependence in Decisions over Multiple Propositions

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 August 2004

I model sequential decisions over multiple interconnected propositions and investigate path-dependence in such decisions. The propositions and their interconnections are represented in propositional logic. A sequential decision process is path-dependent if its outcome depends on the order in which the propositions are considered. Assuming that earlier decisions constrain later ones, I prove three main results: First, certain rationality violations by the decision-making agent—individual or group—are necessary and sufficient for path-dependence. Second, under some conditions, path-dependence is unavoidable in decisions made by groups. Third, path-dependence makes decisions vulnerable to strategic agenda setting and strategic voting. I also discuss escape routes from path-dependence. My results are relevant to discussions on collective consistency and reason-based decision-making, focusing not only on outcomes, but also on underlying reasons, beliefs, and constraints.

Corresponding author
Lecturer in Political Science, Department of Government, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, U.K. (
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *