A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System¶
Shapley, L. S., & Shubik, M. (1954). A Method for Evaluating the Distribution of Power in a Committee System. American Political Science Review, 48(3), 787-792.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Pivotality
- In voting and social choice, the Banzhaf and Shapley-Shubik power indices measure pivotality — the probability of being pivotal across coalitions — as the operative metric of power in weighted-voting systems, with small pivotal parties in coalition governments illustrating the leverage.
This sourceDefines the Shapley-Shubik index measuring a member's probability of being pivotal across orderings of coalition formation.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The abstract supplies a game-theoretic method for the a priori evaluation of power in committee and weighted-majority systems, i.e. the Shapley-Shubik half only; it says nothing of Banzhaf, pivotality, or coalition governments.
“we offer a method for the a priori evaluation of the division of power among the various bodies and members of a legislature or committee system”
- In voting and social choice, the Banzhaf and Shapley-Shubik power indices measure pivotality — the probability of being pivotal across coalitions — as the operative metric of power in weighted-voting systems, with small pivotal parties in coalition governments illustrating the leverage.
Domain-specific¶
Mechanisms¶
- Shapley–Shubik Power Index
- It is the cleanest way to see that a member given a nonzero vote can still be structurally powerless
This sourceFormalizes voting power so that a member with nominal voting weight can receive zero power when never pivotal.
- It is the cleanest way to see that a member given a nonzero vote can still be structurally powerless
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 3 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:b7784810a725 · see in the full table