Abstract
Nearly two centuries ago, in his essay On the Definition of Political Economy; and on the Method of Investigation Proper to It, John Stuart Mill developed the view that in moral sciences the only certain or scientific mode of investigation is the a priori method, or that of “abstract speculation”. The following quotation concentrates his main argument:
There is a property common to almost all the moral sciences, and by which they are distinguished from many of the physical; this is, that it is seldom in our power to make experiments in them. … We cannot try forms of government and systems of national policy on a diminutive scale in our laboratories, shaping our experiments as we think they may most conduce to the advancement of knowledge. We therefore study nature under circumstances of great disadvantage in these sciences; being confined to the limited number of experiments which take place (if we may so speak) of their own accord, without any preparation or management of ours; in circumstances, moreover, of great complexity, and never perfectly known to us; and with the far greater part of the processes concealed from our observation.1
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Kenneth Joseph Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values, New York: Wiley 1951.
André Blais, Jean-François Laslier, Annie Laurent, Nicolas Sauger, and Karine Van der Straeten, “One Round versus Two Round Elections: An Experimental Study”, in: French Politics, 5, 2007, pp. 278–286.
David A. Bositis and Douglas Steinel, “A Synoptic History and Typology of Experimental Research in Political Science”, in: Political Behavior, 9, 1987, pp. 263–284.
William P. Bottom, Ronald A. King and Larry Handlin, “Miller, G. J., Institutional Modifications of Majority Rule”, in: Vernon L. Smith, Charles R. Plott (Eds.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Amsterdam: North-Holland 2008, pp. 857–871.
Gary W. Cox, Making Votes Count: Strategic Coordination in the World’s Electoral Systems, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1997.
Maurice Duverger, Les partis politiques, Paris: Armand Colin 1951.
Peter C. Fishburn, “Axioms for Approval Voting: Direct Proof ”, in: Journal of Economic Theory, 19, 1978, pp. 180–185.
Wenceslao J. Gonzalez, “The Role of Experiments in the Social Sciences: the Case of Economics”, in: Theo Kuipers (Ed.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Science: General Philosophy of Science - Focal Issues, Amsterdam: Elsevier 2007, pp. 275–301.
Robert E. Goodin and Christian List, “A Conditional Defense of Plurality Rule: Generalizing May’s Theorem in a Restricted Informational Environment”, in: American Journal of Political Science, 50, 4, 2006, pp. 940–949.
Donald P. Green and Ian Shapiro, Pathologies of Rational Choice Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science, New Haven: Yale University Press 1994.
James Konow, “Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories”, in: Journal of Economic Literature, 41, 4, 2003, pp. 1188–1239.
Jean-François Laslier and M. Remzi Sanver (Eds.), Handbook on Approval Voting, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag 2010.
Jean-François Laslier, “In Silico Voting Experiments”, in: Jean-François Laslier and M. Remzi Sanver (Eds.), Handbook on Approval Voting, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag 2010, pp. 311–335.
Jean-François Laslier, “Laboratory Experiments on Approval Voting”, in: Jean-François Laslier and M. Remzi Sanver (Eds.), Handbook on Approval Voting, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag 2010, pp. 339–356.
Kenneth O. May, “A Set of Independent, Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Simple Majoritary Decision”, in: Econometrica, 20, 1952, pp. 680–684.
John C. McCabe-Dansted and Arkadii Slinko, “Exploratory Analysis of Similarities between Social Choice Rules”, in: Group Decision and Negotiation, 15, 2006, pp. 77–107.
John Stuart Mill, (1874). Essays on Some Unsettled Questions of Political Economy, Second Edition, Batoche Books, Kitchener, 2000. (Second Edition London, Longmans, Green, Reader, And Dyer.)
Elinor Ostrom, “Coping with the Tragedy of the Commons”, in: Annual Review of Political Science, 2, 1999, pp. 493–535.
Elinor Ostrom, “The Value-Added of Laboratory Experiments for the Study of Institutions and Common-Pool Resources”, in: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 61, 2006, pp. 149–163.
Charles R. Plott, “Will Economics Become an Experimental Science?”, in: Southern Economic Journal, 57, 1991, pp. 901–919.
William H. Riker, “The Two-Party System and Duverger’s Law: An Essay on the History of Political Science”, in: American Political Science Review, 76, 1982, pp. 753–766.
Thomas Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1960.
Vernon L. Smith, “Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory”, in: The American Economic Review, 66, 2, 1976, pp. 274–279.
Vernon L. Smith, “Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science”, in: American Economic Review, 72, 1982, pp. 923–955.
Vernon L. Smith, “Experimental Economics: Reply”, in: The American Economic Review, 75, 1, 1985, pp. 265–272.
Vernon L. Smith, “Theory, Experiment and Economics”, in: The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3, 1, 1989, pp. 151–169.
Vernon L. Smith, “Economics in the Laboratory”, in: The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8, 1, 1994, pp. 113–131.
Vernon L. Smith, Rationality in Economics. Constructivist and Ecological Forms, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2008.
H. Peyton Young, “An Axiomatization of Borda’s Rule”, in: Journal of Economic Theory, 9, 1974, pp. 43–52.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Miroiu, A. (2012). Experiments in Political Science: The Case of the Voting Rules. In: Dieks, D., Gonzalez, W., Hartmann, S., Stöltzner, M., Weber, M. (eds) Probabilities, Laws, and Structures. The Philosophy of Science in a European Perspective, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3030-4_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3030-4_29
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-3029-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-3030-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)