Publication:
Strategic Voting Behavior in Doodle Polls

Thumbnail Image

Date

2015

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Zou, James, Reshef Meir, and David C. Parkes. 2015. Strategic Voting Behavior in Doodle Polls. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, March 14-18, 2015, Vancouver, Canada, 464-472. New York: Association for Computing Machinery

Research Data

Abstract

Finding a common time slot for a group event is a daily conundrum and illustrates key features of group decision-making. It is a complex interplay of individual incentives and group dynamics. A participant would like the final time to be convenient for her, but she is also expected to be cooperative towards other people's preferences. We combine large-scale data analysis with theoretical models from the voting literature to investigate strategic behaviors in event scheduling. We analyze all Doodle polls created in the US from July-September 2011 (over 340,000 polls), consisting of both hidden polls (a user cannot see other responses) and open polls (a user can see all previous responses). By analyzing the differences in behavior in hidden and open polls, we gain unique insights into strategies that people apply in a natural decision-making setting. Responders in open polls are more likely to approve slots that are very popular or very unpopular, but not intermediate slots. We show that this behavior is inconsistent with models that have been proposed in the voting literature, and propose a new model based on combining personal and social utilities to explain the data.

Description

Other Available Sources

Keywords

event scheduling, strategic voting, Doodle, group dynamics

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles (OAP), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories