Suchergebnisse

AbstractAre there group decision methods which (i) give everyone, including minorities, an equal share of effective decision power even when voters act strategically, (ii) promote consensus and equality, rather than polarization and inequality, and (iii) do not favour the status quo or rely too much on chance? We describe two non-deterministic group decision methods that meet these criteria, one based on automatic bargaining over lotteries, the other on conditional commitments to approve compromise options. Using theoretical analysis, agent-based simulations and a behavioral experiment, we show that these methods prevent majorities from consistently suppressing minorities, which can happen in deterministic methods, and keeps proponents of the status quo from blocking decisions, as in other consensus-based approaches. Our simulations show that these methods achieve aggregate welfare comparable to common voting methods, while employing chance judiciously, and that the welfare costs of fairness and consensus are small compared to the inequality costs of majoritarianism. In an incentivized experiment with naive participants, we find that a sizable fraction of participants prefers to use a non-deterministic voting method over Plurality Voting to allocate monetary resources. However, this depends critically on their position within the group. Those in the majority show a strong preference for majoritarian voting methods.

Abstract
The world is grappling with emerging, urgent, large-scale problems, such as climate change, pollution, biodiversity loss, and pandemics, which demand immediate and coordinated action. Social processes like conformity and social norms can either help maintain behaviors (e.g. cooperation in groups) or drive rapid societal change (e.g. rapid rooftop solar uptake), even without comprehensive policy measures. While the role of individual heterogeneity in such processes is well studied, there is limited work on the expression of individuals' preferences and the role of anticonformists—individuals who value acting differently from others—especially in dynamic environments. We introduce anticonformists into a game-theoretical collective decision-making framework that includes a complex network of agents with heterogeneous preferences about two alternative options. We study how anticonformists' presence changes the population's ability to express evolving personal preferences. We find that anticonformists facilitate the expression of preferences, even when they diverge from prevailing norms, breaking the "spiral of silence" whereby individuals do not act on their preferences when they believe others disapprove. Centrally placed anticonformists reduce by five-fold the number of anticonformists needed for a population to express its preferences. In dynamic environments where a previously unpopular choice becomes preferred, anticonformists catalyze social tipping and reduce the "cultural lag," even beyond the role of committed minorities—that is, individuals with a commitment to a specific cause. This research highlights the role of dissenting voices in shaping collective behavior, including their potential to catalyze the adoption of new technologies as they become favorable and to enrich democracy by facilitating the expression of views.

AbstractObjectiveWe investigate the impact of a global health crisis on political behavior. Specifically, we assess the impact of Covid‐19 incidence rates, and the impact of temporal and spatial proximity to the crisis, on voter turnout in the 2020 Brazilian municipal elections.MethodsWe use Ordinary Least Squares and Spatial Durbin Error models to evaluate sub‐national variation in municipal‐level Covid‐19 incidence and voter turnout. We include controls for political, economic, health, and state context.ResultsCeteris paribus, increasing deaths in the month leading up to the election from 0.01 to 1 per 1000 people is associated with a 5 percentage point decrease in turnout; higher cases and deaths earlier in the pandemic are generally associated with higher turnout. Covid‐19 incidence rates in nearby municipalities affect local turnout in the same directions.ConclusionHigher Covid‐19 incidence near the time of the election decreases voter turnout, while incidence farther from the election increases voter turnout.

Social tipping can accelerate beneficial changes in behaviour in diverse domains from equality and social justice to climate change. Hypothetically, however, group identities might undermine tipping in ways policy makers do not anticipate. To examine this, we implemented an experiment around the 2020 U.S. elections. Participants faced consistent incentives to coordinate their choices. Once participants had established a coordination norm, an intervention created pressure to tip to a new norm. Our control treatment used neutral labels for choices. Our identity treatment used partisan political images. This simple payoff-irrelevant relabelling generated extreme differences. Control groups developed norms slowly before intervention but transitioned to new norms rapidly after intervention. Identity groups developed norms rapidly before intervention but persisted in a state of costly disagreement after intervention. Tipping was powerful but fragile. It supported striking cultural changes when choices and identity were unlinked, but even a trivial link destroyed tipping entirely.

Polarization on various issues has increased in many Western democracies over the last decades, leading to divergent beliefs, preferences, and behaviors within societies. We develop a model to investigate the effects of polarization on the likelihood that a society will coordinate on a welfare-improving action in a context in which collective benefits are acquired only if enough individuals take that action. We examine the impacts of different manifestations of polarization: heterogeneity of preferences, segregation of the social network, and the interaction between the two. In this context, heterogeneity captures differential perceived benefits from coordinating, which can lead to different intentions and sensitivity regarding the intentions of others. Segregation of the social network can create a bottleneck in information flows about others' preferences, as individuals may base their decisions only on their close neighbors. Additionally, heterogeneous preferences can be evenly distributed in the population or clustered in the local network, respectively reflecting or systematically departing from the views of the broader society. The model predicts that heterogeneity of preferences alone is innocuous and it can even be beneficial, while segregation can hamper coordination, mainly when local networks distort the distribution of valuations. We base these results on a multimethod approach including an online group experiment with 750 individuals. We randomize the range of valuations associated with different choice options and the information respondents have about others. The experimental results reinforce the idea that, even in a situation in which all could stand to gain from coordination, polarization can impede social progress.