Optimal voting schemes with costly information acquisition

A group of individuals with identical preferences must make a decision under uncertainty about which decision is best. Before the decision is made, each agent can privately acquire a costly and imperfect signal. We discuss how to design a mechanism for eliciting and aggregating the collected information so as to maximize ex-ante social welfare. We first show that, of all mechanisms, a sequential one is optimal and works as follows. At random, one agent at a time is selected to acquire information and report the resulting signal. Agents are informed of neither their position in the sequence nor of other reports. Acquiring information when called upon and reporting truthfully is an equilibrium. We next characterize the ex-ante optimal scheme among all ex-post efficient mechanisms. In this mechanism, a decision is made when the precision of the posterior exceeds a cut-off that decreases with each additional report. The restriction to ex-post efficiency is shown to be without loss when the available signals are sufficiently imprecise. On the other hand, ex-post efficient mechanisms are shown to be suboptimal when the cost of information acquisition is sufficiently small.

[1]  Michael Suk-Young Chwe,et al.  Minority Voting Rights Can Maximize Majority Welfare , 1999, American Political Science Review.

[2]  Dino Gerardi,et al.  Committee Design in the Presence of Communication , 2003 .

[3]  Dirk Bergemann,et al.  Information Acquisition and Efficient Mechanism Design , 2000 .

[4]  R. Myerson MULTISTAGE GAMES WITH COMMUNICATION , 1984 .

[5]  David Austen-Smith,et al.  The Inferiority of Deliberation Under Unanimity , 2002 .

[6]  T. Feddersen,et al.  Convicting the Innocent: The Inferiority of Unanimous Jury Verdicts under Strategic Voting , 1996, American Political Science Review.

[7]  J. Banks,et al.  Information Aggregation, Rationality, and the Condorcet Jury Theorem , 1996, American Political Science Review.

[8]  K. Mukhopadhaya Jury Size and the Free Rider Problem , 2003 .

[9]  Dino Gerardi,et al.  Information Acquisition in Committees , 2007 .

[10]  Paul R. Milgrom,et al.  Rational Expectations, Information Acquisition, and Competitive Bidding , 1981 .

[11]  N. Persico Committee Design with Endogenous Information , 2004 .

[12]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  Overcoming free riding in multi-party computations - The anonymous case , 2006, Games Econ. Behav..

[13]  N. Persico Information acquisition in auctions , 2000 .

[14]  T. Feddersen,et al.  Voting Behavior and Information Aggregation in Elections with Private Information , 1997 .

[15]  D. Zizzo,et al.  Rational Expectations , 2006 .

[16]  M. Degroot Optimal Statistical Decisions , 1970 .

[17]  T. Feddersen,et al.  The Swing Voter's Curse , 1996 .

[18]  Dino Gerardi,et al.  Deliberative voting , 2007, J. Econ. Theory.

[19]  Arlind Kopliku Information Aggregation , 2009, INFORSID.

[20]  Michele Piccione,et al.  Sequential Voting Procedures in Symmetric Binary Elections , 2000, Journal of Political Economy.

[21]  Richard P. McLean,et al.  FULL EXTRACTION OF THE SURPLUS IN BAYESIAN AND DOMINANT STRATEGY AUCTIONS , 1988 .

[22]  Hongbin Cai,et al.  Costly participation and heterogeneous preferences in informational committees , 2009 .

[23]  R. Myerson Optimal coordination mechanisms in generalized principal–agent problems , 1982 .

[24]  César Martinelli,et al.  Would rational voters acquire costly information? , 2006, J. Econ. Theory.

[25]  A. McLennan Consequences of the Condorcet Jury Theorem for Beneficial Information Aggregation by Rational Agents , 1998, American Political Science Review.

[26]  P. Reny,et al.  Correlated Information and Mechanism Design , 1992 .

[27]  Francis D. Wilson,et al.  A Theory of Conservatism , 1941, American Political Science Review.

[28]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  Overcoming Free Riding in Multi-Party Computations , 2005, Computing and Markets.