We consider a persuasion game where multiple experts with potentially conflicting self-interests attempt to persuade a decision-maker, say, a judge. The judge prefers to take an action that is most appropriate given the true state of the world but the experts' preferences over the actions are...

We consider a persuasion game between a decision-maker and a panel of biased experts. The decision-maker prefers to take an action in [0, 1] that matches the underlying state but relies on the experts to learn the state. Each expert has his `ideal` action or `agenda` and may conceal unfavorable...

We provide a simple condition that is both necessary and sufficient for aggregation of private information in large elections where all voters have the same preference. In some states of the world, all voters prefer A; and in other states, all voters prefer B. Each voter draws a private signal...

We report on an experiment comparing compulsory and voluntary voting institutions in a voting game with common preferences. 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...

We report on an experiment comparing compulsory and voluntary voting mechanisms. Theory predicts that these different mechanisms have different implications both for the sincerity of the voting decisions and for the participation decisions of voters, and we find strong support for these...

. . .

. . .

While many theories of the firm seek to explain when firms make rather than buy, in practice firms often make and buy the same input- they engage in plural sourcing. We argue that explaining the mix of external procurement and internal sourcing for the same input requires a consideration of...