Does Quadratic Voting for Survey Research Improve Policy-Making and Decision Outcomes?

Abstract This pilot study explores the feasibility of using Quadratic Voting for Survey Research (QVSR) as an alternative to the traditional Likert scale in a municipal decision-making context. By observing decision-makers’ behavior and voting outcomes, the study provides descriptive evidence on how these two survey methodologies perform in practice. While standard democratic processes often overlook the intensity of citizen preferences, QVSR allows individuals to express preference strength using a limited credit system. In contrast, the Likert scale, though widely used, may be susceptible to response biases and assumptions about sincerity. Previous studies have demonstrated the theoretical and experimental promise of QVSR; this pilot extends that work by assessing its feasibility and practical implementation in a real-world policy environment. Conducted in the Gabba Ward municipality in Brisbane, Australia, the study randomly assigned citizens and policymakers to QVSR or Likert conditions and describes patterns in the alignment between citizen responses and councilor voting. The results are exploratory and intended to inform future, larger-scale evaluations of QVSR’s potential to support more nuanced and representative forms of democratic engagement.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Review of Law & Economics
Published
2025-12-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2025-0078
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.20
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does Quadratic Voting for Survey Research Improve Policy-Making and Decision Outcomes?

G Dias, Madeline E. Bassetti, Daniel L. Chen
1 citations
Review of Law & Economics
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
4.20
article

Does Quadratic Voting for Survey Research Improve Policy-Making and Decision Outcomes?

G Dias, Madeline E. Bassetti, Daniel L. Chen
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This pilot study explores the feasibility of using Quadratic Voting for Survey Research (QVSR) as an alternative to the traditional Likert scale in a municipal decision-making context. By observing decision-makers’ behavior and voting outcomes, the study provides descriptive evidence on how these two survey methodologies perform in practice. While standard democratic processes often overlook the intensity of citizen preferences, QVSR allows individuals to express preference strength using a limited credit system. In contrast, the Likert scale, though widely used, may be susceptible to response biases and assumptions about sincerity. Previous studies have demonstrated the theoretical and experimental promise of QVSR; this pilot extends that work by assessing its feasibility and practical implementation in a real-world policy environment. Conducted in the Gabba Ward municipality in Brisbane, Australia, the study randomly assigned citizens and policymakers to QVSR or Likert conditions and describes patterns in the alignment between citizen responses and councilor voting. The results are exploratory and intended to inform future, larger-scale evaluations of QVSR’s potential to support more nuanced and representative forms of democratic engagement.

Review of Law & EconomicsVol. 21(4)
University of Chicago (US), Toulouse School of Economics (FR), World Bank Group (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
4.20
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Does Quadratic Voting for Survey Research Improve Policy-Making and Decision Outcomes? — G Dias, Madeline E. Bassetti, et al. · Review of Law & Economics (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS