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.
