Nanson, E. J. (1882). «Methods of election: Ware's Method». Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria19: 206. «The method was, however, mentioned by Condorcet, but only to be condemned.»
Condorcet, Jean-Antoine-Nicolas de Caritat (1788). On the Constitution and the Functions of Provincial Assemblies(en francés)13 (publicado el 1804). p. 243. «En effet, lorsqu'il y a plus de trois concurrents, le véritable vœu de la pluralité peut être pour un candidat qui n'ait eu aucune des voix dans le premier scrutin.»
Toplak, Jurij (2006). «The parliamentary election in Slovenia, October 2004». Electoral Studies25 (4): 825-831. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2005.12.006.
Tangian, Andranik (2000). «Unlikelihood of Condorcet's paradox in a large society». Social Choice and Welfare17 (2): 337-365. S2CID19382306. doi:10.1007/s003550050024.
Tangian, Andranik (2000). «Unlikelihood of Condorcet's paradox in a large society». Social Choice and Welfare17 (2): 337-365. S2CID19382306. doi:10.1007/s003550050024.
Riker, William Harrison (1982). Liberalism against populism: a confrontation between the theory of democracy and the theory of social choice. Waveland Pr. pp. 29-30. ISBN0881333670. OCLC316034736. «Ordinal utility is a measure of preferences in terms of rank orders—that is, first, second, etc. ... Cardinal utility is a measure of preferences on a scale of cardinal numbers, such as the scale from zero to one or the scale from one to ten.»
