Risk Aversion, Over-Confidence and Private Information as Determinants of Majority Thresholds

We study, both theoretically and experimentally, the relation between preferred majority thresholds and behavioral traits such as the degree of risk aversion and the subjective confidence on others preferences over the alternative to vote. The main theoretical findings are supported by experimental data. The majority threshold chosen by a subject is positively and significantly correlated with her degree of risk aversion while it is negatively and significantly associated to her confidence on others’ votes. Moreover, in a treatment in which each subject can privately observe the distribution of preferences over a sub-group of participants, we find that the quality of information crowds-out subject's confidence

Voting as a Lottery

Voting is a lottery in which an individual who is uncertain about how the others vote wins if she belongs to the majority or loses if she falls into the minority. The risk of losing can be reduced by increasing the majority threshold. This however has the negative effect of also lowering the chance to win. We find that an individual prefers higher majority thresholds when she is more risk averse, less powerful, or less optimistic about the chance that others will vote like her. De facto, raising the majority threshold is a form of protection against the higher risk of being tyrannized by an unfavorable majority. We include these preferences for majority thresholds in a Nash bargaining game that describes constitutional negotiations over voting rules. Individuals that largely avert the risk of being tyrannized behave reluctantly during negotiations, and succeed in getting higher protection through a threshold raise.majority rule, supermajority, risk aversion

Voting as a Lottery

Supermajorities have their advantage as well as their disadvantage: they provide an hedge against being in the minority, but they make being in the majority less likely. We characterize this trade-off and compute the most preferred majority threshold. The relevant parameters are voting power, risk aversion and pessimism. People who feel powerful prefer low thresholds. High thresholds are preferred by risk averters or by those who are pessimistic about being in the majority. Further we study constitutional agreements on the voting rule. Members of the constituent assembly are heterogeneous in the parameters above. We show that weak and minority members succeed in pushing forward on high and protective rules

Voting as a Lottery

This paper studies the issue of constitutional design, and supermajorities in particular, from a behavioral economics perspective. The relevant parameters are voting power, risk aversion, and pessimism. Voters who feel powerful prefer lower thresholds, while risk averters and those who feel pessimistic about the majority prefer higher thresholds. We also analyze the effects of loss aversion and overconfidence. The former leads voters to prefer more protective voting rules, a manifestation of their bias towards the status quo. The latter leads them to prefer overly low (high) protection when they receive good (bad) news about how others will vote. Finally, we study constitutional agreements on the voting rule. Members of the constituent assembly are heterogeneous in the parameters above. Weak and minority members anticipate high expropriation risk in future decisions. This gives them consistent leverage to push for a protective constitution

Voting as a Lottery.

Voting is a lottery in which an individual who is uncertain about how the others vote wins if she belongs to the majority or loses if she falls into the minority. The risk of losing can be reduced by increasing the majority threshold. This however has the negative effect of also lowering the chance to win. We find that an individual prefers higher majority thresholds when she is more risk averse, less powerful,or less optimistic about the chance that others will vote like her. Defacto, raising the majority threshold is a form of protection against the higher risk of being tyrannized by an unfavorable majority. We include these preferences for majority thresholds in a Nash bargaining game that describes constitutional negotiations over voting rules. Individuals that largely avert the risk of being tyrannized behave reluctantly during negotiations, and succeed in getting higher protection through a threshold raise.majority rule, supermajority, risk aversion, weighted votes, constitutions

Risk Aversion, Over-Confidence and Private Information as determinants of Majority Thresholds

We present and experimentally test a theoretical model of majority threshold determination as a function of voters’ risk preferences. The experimental results confirm the theoretical prediction of a positive correlation between a voter’s risk aversion and the corresponding preferred majority threshold. Furthermore, the experimental results show that a voter’s optimal majority threshold negatively relates to the voter’s confidence about how others will vote. Moreover, in a treatment in which individuals receive a private signal about others’ voting behavior, the private signal tends to replace confidence

Risk Aversion, Over-Confidence and Private Information as Determinants of Majority Thresholds

TSE (Toulouse School of Economics) Working Papers, 09-08

Risk Aversion, Over-Confidence and Private Information as Determinants of Majority Thresholds

We study, both theoretically and experimentally, the relation between preferred majority thresholds and behavioral traits such as the degree of risk aversion and the subjective confidence on others preferences over the alternative to vote. The main theoretical findings are supported by experimental data. The majority threshold chosen by a subject is positively and significantly correlated with her degree of risk aversion while it is negatively and significantly associated to her confidence on others’ votes. Moreover, in a treatment in which each subject can privately observe the distribution of preferences over a sub-group of participants, we find that the quality of information crowds-out subject's confidence.majority threshold, risk aversion, (over-)confidence

Risk Aversion, Over-Confidence and Private Information as Determinants of Majority Thresholds.

We present and experimentally test a theoretical model of majority threshold determination as a function of voters' risk preferences. The experimental results confirm the theoretical prediction of a positive correlation between a voter's risk aversion and the corresponding preferred majority threshold. Furthermore, the experimental results show that a voter's optimal majority threshold negatively relates to the voter's confidence about how others will vote. Moreover, in a treatment in which individuals receive a private signal about others' voting behavior, the private signal tends to replace confidence.majority threshold, risk aversion, (over-)confidence, laboratory experiment.