Abstract
A donation paradox occurs when a player gives an apparently valuable prerogative to another player, but 'does better', according to some criterion. Peremptory challenges, used in choosing a American jury, permit each side to veto a certain number of potential jurors. With even a very simple model of jury selection, it is shown that for one side to give a peremptory challenge to the other side may lead to a more favorable jury, an instance of the donation paradox. Both a theorem and examples are given concerning the existence of the donation paradox in the optimal use of peremptory challenges.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 139-151 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Theory and Decision |
| Volume | 47 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| State | Published - 1999 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Backwards induction
- Candidate types
- Donation paradox
- Jury
- Power
- Sequential decision
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Economics and Econometrics
- Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Cite this
The donation paradox for peremptory challenges. / Kadane, Joseph B.; Stone, Christopher A.; Wallstrom, Garrick.
In: Theory and Decision, Vol. 47, No. 2, 1999, p. 139-151.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - The donation paradox for peremptory challenges
AU - Kadane, Joseph B.
AU - Stone, Christopher A.
AU - Wallstrom, Garrick
PY - 1999
Y1 - 1999
N2 - A donation paradox occurs when a player gives an apparently valuable prerogative to another player, but 'does better', according to some criterion. Peremptory challenges, used in choosing a American jury, permit each side to veto a certain number of potential jurors. With even a very simple model of jury selection, it is shown that for one side to give a peremptory challenge to the other side may lead to a more favorable jury, an instance of the donation paradox. Both a theorem and examples are given concerning the existence of the donation paradox in the optimal use of peremptory challenges.
AB - A donation paradox occurs when a player gives an apparently valuable prerogative to another player, but 'does better', according to some criterion. Peremptory challenges, used in choosing a American jury, permit each side to veto a certain number of potential jurors. With even a very simple model of jury selection, it is shown that for one side to give a peremptory challenge to the other side may lead to a more favorable jury, an instance of the donation paradox. Both a theorem and examples are given concerning the existence of the donation paradox in the optimal use of peremptory challenges.
KW - Backwards induction
KW - Candidate types
KW - Donation paradox
KW - Jury
KW - Power
KW - Sequential decision
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0042765306&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0042765306&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0042765306
VL - 47
SP - 139
EP - 151
JO - Theory and Decision
JF - Theory and Decision
SN - 0040-5833
IS - 2
ER -