Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Epistemic aspects of representative government

  • Robert E. Goodin (a1) (a2) and Kai Spiekermann (a3)
Abstract

The Federalist, justifying the Electoral College to elect the president, claimed that a small group of more informed individuals would make a better decision than the general mass. But the Condorcet Jury Theorem tells us that the more independent, better-than-random voters there are, the more likely it will be that the majority among them will be correct. The question thus arises as to how much better, on average, members of the smaller group would have to be to compensate for the epistemic costs of making decisions on the basis of that many fewer votes. This question is explored in the contexts of referendum democracy, delegate-style representative democracy, and trustee-style representative democracy.

Copyright
Corresponding author
* E-mail: Bob.Goodin@anu.edu.au
References
Hide All
Austen-Smith, D.Banks, J.S. (1996), ‘Information aggregation, rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem’, American Political Science Review 90(1): 3445.
Ben-Yashar, R.Paroush, J. (2000), ‘A non-asymptotic Condorcet Jury Theorem’, Social Choice and Welfare 17: 189199.
Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D.Welch, I. (1992), ‘A theory of fads, fashion, custom and cultural change as informational cascades’, Journal of Political Economy 100: 9921026.
Black, D. (1958), The Theory of Committees and Elections, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bohman, J.Rehg, W. (eds) (1997), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Boland, P., Proschan, F.Tong, Y.L. (1989), ‘Modelling dependence in simple and indirect majority systems’, Journal of Applied Probability 26(1): 8188.
Bovens, L.Rabinowicz, W. (2006), ‘Democratic answers to complex questions – an epistemic perspective’, Synthese 150: 131153.
Brennan, G.Hamlin, A. (1992), ‘Bicameralism and majoritarian equilibrium’, Public Choice 74: 169179.
Condorcet, M. de (1785), ‘Essai sur l'application de l'analyse à la probabilite des decisions rendues à la pluralite des voix, Paris: l'Imprimerie Royale’, Reprinted in part in K.M. Baker (ed.), Condorcet: Selected Writings, Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1976, pp. 3370.
Delli Carpini, M.Keeter, S. (1996), What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dietrich, F. (2008), ‘The premises of Condorcet's Jury Theorem are not simultaneously justified’, Episteme 58: 5673.
Dietrich, F.List, C. (2004), ‘A model of jury decisions where all jurors have the same evidence’, Synthese 142: 175202.
Downs, A. (1957), An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper.
Dryzek, J.S. (2000), Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Estlund, D.M. (1989), ‘Democratic theory and the public interest: Condorcet and Rousseau revisited’, American Political Science Review 38: 13171322.
Feddersen, T.Pesendorfer, W. (1998), ‘Convicting the innocent: the inferiority of unanimous jury verdicts under strategic voting’, American Political Science Review 92(1): 2335.
Fuerstein, M. (2008), ‘Epistemic democracy and the social character of knowledge’, Episteme 5: 7493.
Goodin, R.E. (2008), Innovating Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grofman, B., Owen, G.Feld, S. (1983), ‘Thirteen theorems in search of the truth’, Theory & Decision 15: 261278.
Hamilton, A. (1788), ‘Federalist No. 68’, in J. Cooke (ed.), The Federalist, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1961, pp. 457462.
Inter-Parliamentary Union. (2010), ‘PARLINE database on national parliaments’. Retrieved 7 April 2010 from http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/parlinesearch.asp
Kaniovski, S. (2010), ‘Aggregation of correlated votes and Condorcet's Jury Theorem’, Theory and Decision 69(3): 453468.
Kaniovski, S.Zaigraev, A. (2011), ‘Optimal jury design for homogeneous juries with correlated votes’, Theory and Decision 71(4): 439459.
Ladha, K. (1992), ‘The Condorcet Jury Theorem, free speech and correlated votes’, American Journal of Political Science 36: 617634.
Ladha, K. (1993), ‘Condorcet's Jury Theorem in light of de Finetti's theorem’, Social Choice and Welfare 10(1): 6985.
Ladha, K. (1995), ‘Information pooling through majority-rule voting: Condorcet's Jury Theorem with correlated votes’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 26(3): 353372.
List, C. (2003), ‘On the significance of the absolute margin’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55: 521544.
List, C. (2005), ‘The probability of inconsistencies in complex collective decisions’, Social Choice and Welfare 24: 331.
List, C.Goodin, R.E. (2001), ‘Epistemic democracy: generalizing the Condorcet Jury Theorem’, Journal of Political Philosophy 9: 277306.
List, C.Pettit, P. (2004), ‘An epistemic free-riding problem?’, in P. Catton and G. Macdonald (eds), Karl Popper: Critical Appraisals, Abington: Routledge, pp. 128158.
Lupia, A.W.McCubbins, M.D. (1998), The Democratic Dilemma, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Luskin, R.C., Fishkin, J.S.Jowell, R. (2002), ‘Considered opinions: deliberative polling in Britain’, British Journal of Political Science 32: 455488.
Madison, J. (1787a), ‘Federalist no. 10’, in J. Cooke (ed.), The Federalist, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1961, pp. 5665.
Madison, J. (1787b), ‘Federalist no. 58’, in J. Cooke (ed.), The Federalist, Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1961, pp. 392395.
Miller, D. (1992), ‘Deliberative democracy and social choice’, Political Studies 40(5): 5467.
Montesquieu, C. (1721), Persian Letters (translated by C. Bett), Harmondsworth, Mddx: Penguin, 1973.
Owen, G.Grofman, B. (1984), ‘To vote or not to vote: the paradox of nonvoting’, Public Choice 42: 311325.
Owen, G., Grofman, B.Feld, S. (1989), ‘Proving a distribution-free generalization of the Condorcet Jury Theorem’, Mathematical Social Sciences 17: 116.
Page, B.I.Shapiro, R.Y. (1992), The Rational Public, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Pigozzi, G. (2006), ‘Belief merging and the discursive dilemma: an argument-based account to paradoxes of judgment aggregation’, Synthese 152: 285298.
Rosenkranz, N. (2007), ‘Condorcet and the constitution’, Stanford Law Review 59: 12811308.
Spiekermann, K.Goodin, R.E. (forthcoming), ‘Courts of many minds’, British Journal of Political Science.
Sunstein, C.R. (2009), A Constitution of Many Minds, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Vermeule, A. (2009), Law and the Limits of Reason, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Waldron, J. (1989), ‘Democratic theory and the public interest: Condorcet and Rousseau revisited’, American Political Science Review 38(4): 13221328.
Zaigraev, A.Kaniovski, S. (2010), ‘Bounds on the competence of a homogeneous jury’, Theory and Decision 5 (forthcoming: available online DOI: 10.1007/s11238-010-9216-5).
Recommend this journal

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

European Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 1755-7739
  • EISSN: 1755-7747
  • URL: /core/journals/european-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed