We study the manipulability of stable matching mechanisms and
show that manipulability comparisons are equivalent to preference
comparisons: for any agent, a mechanism is more manipulable than
another if and only if this agent prefers the latter to the former. One
important implication is that when agents on one side of the market
have unit demand, no stable matching mechanism is less manipulable
than another for all agents. (JEL C78, D82)
Chen, Peter, Michael Egesdal, Marek Pycia, and M. Bumin Yenmez.
"Manipulability of Stable Mechanisms."
American Economic Journal: Microeconomics,
Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design