  Iterative voting is a natural model of repeated strategic decision-making in
social choice when agents have the opportunity to update their votes prior to
finalizing the group decision. Prior work has analyzed the efficacy of
iterative plurality on the welfare of the chosen outcome at equilibrium,
relative to the truthful vote profile, via an adaptation of the price of
anarchy. However, prior analyses have only studied the worst- and average-case
performances when agents' preferences are distributed by the impartial culture.
This work extends average-case analysis to a wider class of distributions and
distinguishes when iterative plurality improves or degrades asymptotic welfare.
