  Mechanism design is concerned with settings where a policymaker (or social
planner) faces the problem of aggregating the announced preferences of multiple
agents into a collective (or social), system-wide decision. One of the most
important ways for aggregating preference that has been used in multi-agent
systems is election. In an election, the aim is to select the candidate who
reflects the common will of society. Despite the importance of this subject, in
some situations, the result of the election does not respect the purpose of
those who execute it and the election leads to dissatisfaction of a large
amount of people and in some cases causes polarization in societies. To analyze
these situations, we introduce a new notion called social disappointment and we
show which voting rules can prevent it in elections. In addition, we propose
new protocols to prevent social disappointment in elections. A version of the
impossibility theorem is proved regarding social disappointment in elections,
showing that there is no voting rule for four or more candidates that
simultaneously satisfies avoiding social disappointment and Condorcet winner
criteria. We give conditions under which one of our new protocols always
selects the Condorcet winner under the assumption of single peakedness. We
empirically compare our protocols with seven well-known other voting protocols
and observe that our protocols are capable of preventing social disappointment
and are more robust against manipulations.
