Goodin, Robert E. and Spiekermann, Kai (2012) Epistemic aspects of representative government. European political science review, 4 (3). pp. 303-325. ISSN 1755-7739
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.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Official URL: | http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJourna... |
| Additional Information: | © 2012 Cambridge University Press |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Condorcet Jury Theorem, epistemic democracy, representative government, Federalist papers, referendum |
| Library of Congress subject classification: | J Political Science > JC Political theory |
| Sets: | Departments > Government |
| Rights: | http://www.lse.ac.uk/library/rights/LSERO.htm |
| URL: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/41542/ |
Actions (login required)
 |
Record administration - authorised staff only |
