In every government course he teaches, Assistant Professor William Hixon likes to introduce a story. He assigns stories or readings to his students and asks that they examine them as case studies, testing theories and other constructs covered in class. He hopes that in doing so, they will come to see and appreciate how patterns emerge in politics, a personal interest that has guided his own research.

A political scientist trained in game theory and social choice theory, who uses quantitative analysis to examine leadership and coalition building in Congress and the American political system at large, Hixon is fascinated by the nitty-gritty of political maneuvering — how specific political strategies are employed to manipulate outcomes and achieve individual ends. While he regularly employs quantitative methodology to uncover and map patterns of political behavior, he notes that it is not always the pattern itself that is intrinsically interesting but any meaningful deviation from it — the twists and turns that unexpectedly arise, often due to the skill of one politician.

The author of several articles published in political science journals on the use of floor procedures and legislature rules in the U.S. House of Representatives, he recently presented a paper, “Heresthetics and Game Theory” at the Midwest Political Science Association conference. Another paper, “Agendas, Side Issues, and Leadership in the U.S. House,” has been accepted for publication by the Journal of Theoretical Politics.