Memetics & Voting: How Nature May Make
نویسندگان
چکیده
We consider the classic puzzle of why people turn out for elections in substantial numbers even though formal analysis strongly suggests that rational agents would not vote. If one assumes that voters do not make systematic mistakes, the most plausible explanation seems to be that agents receive a warm glow from the act of voting itself. However, this begs the question of why agents feel a warm glow from participating in the electoral process in the first place. We approach this question from an memetic standpoint. More specifically, we consider a model in which social norms, ideas, values, or more generally, “memes” influence the behavior of groups of agents, and in turn, induce a kind of competition between value systems. We show for a range of situations that groups with a more public-spirited social norm have an advantage over groups that are not as public-spirited. We also explore conditions under which the altruistic behavior resulting from public-spiritedness is disadvantageous. The details depend on the costs of voting, the extent to which different types of citizens agree or disagree over the benefits of various public policies, and the relative proportions of various preference types in the population. We conclude that memetic evolution over social norms may be a force that causes individuals to internalize the benefits that their actions confer on others.
منابع مشابه
Does Internet voting make elections less social? Group voting patterns in Estonian e-voting log files (2013–2015)
Remote Internet voting places the control and secrecy of the immediate voting environment on the shoulder of the individual voter but it also turns voting into yet another on-line activity thus endangering the well-known social nature of voting and possibly reducing the crucial sense of civic duty that is important for a healthy democracy. There is however a complete lack of evidence to what de...
متن کاملCompulsory versus Voluntary Voting An Experimental Study
We report on an experiment comparing compulsory and voluntary voting institutions. Rational choice theory predicts sharp differences in voter behavior between these two institutions. If voting is compulsory, then voters may find it rational to vote insincerely, i.e., against their private information. If voting is voluntary so that abstention is allowed, then sincere voting in accordance with a...
متن کاملThe Evolution of Cultural Resilience and Complexity
The study of memetics has thus far mostly applied a reductionist view of genetics to describe the pathogenic infectivity and transmission dynamics of ideas/memes. In this position paper, we take a first look at some of the distinctive attributes of cultural evolution through the lens of complexity science and theoretical biology. The article comments briefly on connections between memetics and ...
متن کاملHow to Create Trust in Electronic Voting over an Untrusted Platform
Casting electronic votes via an inherently unreliable channel like the Internet in an uncontrolled environment is controversial for two main reasons: The first one is of democratic nature and the second of technical nature. The democratic concerns are about the possible dangers of buying and selling votes and so called "family voting". The technical concerns are how to convince everybody involv...
متن کاملCompulsory versus Voluntary Voting Mechanisms: An Experimental Study∗
We report on an experiment comparing compulsory and voluntary voting mechanisms. Theory predicts that these different mechanisms have important implications both for the sincerity of voting decisions and for the participation decisions of voters, and we find strong support for these theoretical predictions in our experimental data. Voters are able to adapt the sincerity of their votes or their ...
متن کامل