scispace - formally typeset
W

Wolfgang Pesendorfer

Researcher at Princeton University

Publications -  69
Citations -  7280

Wolfgang Pesendorfer is an academic researcher from Princeton University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Stochastic game & Revealed preference. The author has an hindex of 35, co-authored 69 publications receiving 6868 citations. Previous affiliations of Wolfgang Pesendorfer include Northwestern University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Temptation and Self-Control

TL;DR: In this article, a two-period model where ex ante inferior choice may tempt the decision-maker in the second period was studied, where individuals have preferences over sets of alternatives that represent second period choices.
Posted Content

The Swing Voter's Curse

TL;DR: In this article, the existence of a swing voter's curse is demonstrated: less informed indifferent voters strictly prefer to abstain rather than vote for either candidate even when voting is costless, and the equilibrium result that a substantial fraction of the electorate will abstain even though all abstainers strictly prefer voting for one candidate over voting for another.
Journal ArticleDOI

Convicting the Innocent: The Inferiority of Unanimous Jury Verdicts under Strategic Voting

TL;DR: The authors showed that the probability of acquitting an innocent defendant may actually increase with the size of the jury and that a wide variety of voting rules, including simple majority rule, lead to much lower probabilities of both kinds of error.
Journal ArticleDOI

Voting behavior and information aggregation in elections with private information

TL;DR: In this article, the authors analyzed two-candidate elections in which voters are uncertain about the realization of a state variable that affects the utility of all voters and showed that the fraction of voters whose vote depends on their private information goes to zero as the size of the electorate goes to infinity.
Book ChapterDOI

The Case for Mindless Economics

TL;DR: The authors discuss the proposed changes in methodology, together with the neuroeconomic critique of standard economics, and offer a response to the neuro economic critique of the standard economics. But they do not assess the contributions or promise of neuroeconomic research.