Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Fantasy Football Draft: Watch for 'Brain Bias'

National Football League fantasy drafts are underway in preparation for the season — and that means millions of fantasy football coaches are already overthinking their lineups. Before they blame a bad draft slot or a fluke injury for bombing from one week to the next, they might want to look in the mirror and give their head a shake. That’s because there’s good science behind those bad fantasy football decision. Renee Miller, a professor of brain and cognitive sciences at the University of Rochester, studies cognitive biases and literally wrote the book on bias in fantasy sports. She plays fantasy football, too. She warns that our brains are wired to interpret fantasy football results in ways that are suboptimal and illogical. “Biased thinking occurs in everyday life and work, and in fantasy sports,” Miller says. “Through the course of a season, you can see a full range of the ways cognitive bias affects a person’s weekly fantasy matchups.” Here’s the good news: Miller says we can untangle those wires if we know what to look for. Among the biggest culprits are what Miller calls “the endowment effect” (overvaluing and clinging to players you drafted high), “recency bias” (falling in love with last week’s star), and “confirmation bias” (cherry-picking stats that support what you already believe). But especially beware of Week One. Thanks to the “primacy effect,” those games early in the season loom larger in memory than later ones. One hot debut or a disappointing flop can warp a coach’s thinking for weeks. The result? Lineups driven more by emotion than logic — and possibly a lot of pick sixes. Biases aren’t all bad, though. Sometimes instincts pay off. First impressions and recent performances sometimes hold fast. But the best fantasy players, Miller says, know when to slow down and think systematically. They stay skeptical, challenge their gut reactions, and accept that they’ll be wrong sometimes. So before you rage-drop that underperforming wide receiver or crown your Week One sleeper a superstar, remember, the smartest move might be to take a look in the mirror and give your head a shake. Miller is available for interviews for journalists covering fantasy sports. Connect with her by clicking on her profile.

The MBA Halftime Show

Every football game has a moment when the players jog off, the field goes dark, and everyone wants to see what the halftime show will bring. My version came without a marching band or a surprise appearance by Beyoncé. Apparently, at seventy years old and doing my MBA (Yes, this is part IV of a series, links to Part I, II and III), halftime entertainment means staring at your grades, reviewing the game film, and asking yourself one honest question: what have you actually learned? Twelve courses down. Twelve to go. I am at that exact point, catching my breath, and somewhere in the distance I can hear the crowd murmuring, "Is she going to slow down now?" Spoiler alert: no. But let me show you the film first. The first half taught me a few things I did not expect. Technology and I reached an uneasy truce. Brightspace, Carleton University’s online Learning Management system, no longer feels like a hostage negotiation. I can upload a file, format a citation, and navigate a discussion board without a quick prayer beforehand. I would not call us friends, but we can now be left alone in the same room. Group work stopped being terrifying, too, once I understood something I probably should have known after decades in business: most people, students very much included, want to do their best work with the least effort required to get there. It used to sound like an insult. Now it strikes me as the most honest description of how most of us move through life, and in a program with this much content to cover, it is less a character flaw and more a survival strategy everyone quietly agrees to. If I had to pick one night that captures the whole term, it would be the one at ten o'clock, alone in my office, wrestling with an IEEE-formatted statistics report. The references would not cooperate. The formatting seemed to have developed free will, moving when I did not ask it to and refusing to move when I did. My dog Dottie had already gone to bed, which, from her, is roughly the equivalent of a slammed door. What made that night worse was that I was still stinging from a C+ in Financial Accounting. I wish I could tell you I shrugged it off with the wisdom of a mature student. I did not. When the grade first posted, I sat with the portal open for a good ten minutes, refreshing it as though the university might suddenly announce, "Our mistake, Sue. Clearly an A." No such luck. The grade stung more than I expected, and I carried some of that venom into the next course. Somewhere between the misbehaving references and the formatting that refused to cooperate, I realized I was not actually angry at the report. I was doubting myself. That C+ had cracked open a little door I suspect we all carry somewhere inside us, the one self-doubt likes to slip through when nobody is watching. Funny how quickly one lousy grade and a badly behaved reference list can turn into a full existential crisis at 10pm on a Tuesday. Even C's get degrees I kept going anyway and eventually fixed the report. Not gracefully. Not quickly. But I fixed it, closed the laptop, and sat in the dark for a minute, oddly proud of myself over a reference list. That was when the mantra found me again. Even C's get degrees. A friend handed me that one over a year ago, and it has never let me down, mostly because it keeps reminding me that the goal was never a perfect transcript. The goal was to stay in the game. Here is the adjustment I did not see coming. Business school quietly rewired how I make decisions. Full stop. Every decision, including coursework. The MBA program has an annoying habit of asking for evidence. Apparently, "it felt like a good idea at the time" is not an accepted decision-making framework. Who knew? Decades in sales and business taught me to read people, situations, and opportunities quickly, and I still trust that instinct. I just make it work harder now. I review the evidence, clarify what I am trying to accomplish, and ask whether the decision moves me closer to it. I used to pick a vacation package the way most people do. I looked at the brochure, felt something, booked it, and occasionally arrived to discover the "ocean view" required a telescope and a great deal of optimism. I still let myself feel the brochure, but now I also run the numbers, location, reviews, and value relative to cost. Whether it fits what I am trying to accomplish on this trip, rather than the fantasy I had while sitting on my couch. It has also taught me the difference between fear and desire, which sounds very self-helpy for a business degree. Stay with me. Demons run faster than dreams. Fear is fast. Give it half a chance, and it will make the decision before desire has even found its shoes. It tells you not to take the course, introduce your self to a stranger, or book the trip. Not to have the hard conversation. Not to risk looking foolish. As we get older, fear gets clever. It learns to dress itself up as common sense: be careful, be realistic, maybe it's time to slow down, don’t risk. I am learning to ask which one is driving before I commit to anything. A trip. A course load. A conversation I have been avoiding. Somewhere in all of this, I picked up a rule I am borrowing for the rest of my life: know when to stub your toe and when to put on safety boots. Some decisions can survive a little recklessness, the kind where you bump into the coffee table, yelp, and carry on with your evening. Others need the boots laced up before you take a single step. I am also in no hurry to rush toward a tub that enters from the side, thank you very much. That purchase can wait a decade or two. Caution has its place; it just does not get to run my whole calendar yet. The competition for my attention did not step aside just because I enrolled in school. Family wants time. Travel wants planning. Fitness classes want me to learn near choreography. My retirement advocacy wants everything I have left after that, plus a little more it did not ask permission for. Juggling it all has required negotiation skills I learned from a ten-pound dog. Dottie never begs or nags. She picks the one thing she wants, plants herself by the door, and waits, calm and immovable, until it happens. Everything else in the house can carry on without her weighing in. I am trying to negotiate my own priorities the same way. Decide what matters this week. Plant myself there. Let the rest of the noise wait its turn at the door. There is a voice in me that insists I should be doing it all, all the time, at full volume. This new way of deciding has meant learning the difference between what I want and what simply keeps me busy and conveniently away from the things that matter more. If I am being truthful, some of that motion is me pushing back against getting older, trying to prove something, mostly to myself. I have not figured out the balance yet, but at least I am aware enough to keep asking the question. Retirement, as a word, comes loaded with baggage. For most people, retirement still means earned rest, a slower pace, the right to finally exhale. For me, it has meant speeding up. Saying yes to things I never had time for. Treating this next chapter like an accelerator somebody left floored. People ask me, gently and sometimes not so gently, whether I am planning to slow down. I think some of them are really asking whether it is acceptable for them to slow down, and they are hoping I will give them permission. Of course you can. But I suspect others are quietly wondering the opposite, whether they are still allowed to speed up. Again, absolutely. So here it is, freely given, however you need it. Slow down. Speed up. Do some of both and change your mind next Tuesday. Take up Pickleball, or refuse to pick up a paddle just because apparently everyone over sixty has been issued one. Retire your way, not the way the world has always been sold to you. The only permission that truly matters is the one you give yourself. I have more years behind me than ahead of me now, which strikes me as a particularly good reason not to let fear decide what I do with the ones I have left. Most of us compare ourselves to people in similar circumstances. It is useful until it convinces you there is only one correct way to do this. I have never been particularly good at conforming, and it has always clashed with most of my outfits. There is an elective I keep hoping to find in this MBA, the one that teaches that ambition and quiet contentment can share a syllabus. Have not found it yet. Would sign up in a heartbeat. So here is where I stand at the halfway mark. My average has settled at an A- (that’s a minus, not an em dash. Take that Pangram!) This grade still surprises me every time I refresh the grade portal, the same one that put me through those ten rough minutes in Financial Accounting. But the transcript is not really the story. I am not just learning finance, statistics, and marketing. I am getting better at deciding what truly deserves my time, my energy, and, increasingly, the years still ahead of me. Already using the playbook for vacations, for priorities, and for what earns a spot on my calendar and what gets quietly cut. If you are somewhere in your own halftime, take the ten minutes the C+ asked of me. Let the sting have its moment. Mine reminded me that self-doubt can show up at any age. Fortunately, so can the determination to tell it to get lost. Then get back to writing your second half. The halftime show is supposed to be the big spectacle everyone remembers, with fireworks, a surprise guest, the works. I used to think I was waiting for my own JLo and Shakira moment, a grand, glittering proof that all this effort adds up to something spectacular. I do not think that is coming, and I have made my peace with it. That spectacle belongs to somebody else's show. Mine is different. In the second half, I am just calling my own plays, one deliberate decision at a time, with a ten-pound dog refereeing from the sidelines and no patience for a false start. Not to be outdone by JLo, my MBA halftime show featured its own wardrobe malfunction. My costume never slipped on live television. Instead, I changed out of a sixty-nine-year-old outfit called Perfection and into something that fits: my own judgment, a mantra with some mileage on it, and whatever grade shows up next. All out in the open for anyone to see. Cameras can roll. So, second half. Still curious. Occasionally humbled. Considerably less afraid of a C+ than I was a few weeks ago. There is still time on the clock, and I intend to use every last minute. Don't Retire… ReWire! Sue My Book is Available for Pre-Order I hope you will consider pre-ordering a copy of Your Retirement Reset for you, a friend or loved one. It's available September 29, 2026 published by ECW Press - You can now order at Indigo or Amazon. And if you love supporting Canadian booksellers, please also check with your local independent bookstore. Most can easily order it for you.

Built to Last: What It Takes to Compete Across Generations of World Cups

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is giving fans an unusual view of football history: several of the game’s biggest names are still competing long after most elite careers have ended. Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi are appearing in their sixth World Cups. Ronaldo has scored twice in this tournament and 10 times overall, while Messi has added six goals in 2026 to reach 19 for his World Cup career. Luka Modrić is playing in his fifth tournament. Neymar and Kevin De Bruyne are each appearing in their fourth. Those numbers say something important about talent. They say even more about durability. Reaching one World Cup is difficult. Returning four, five or six times means surviving nearly two decades of club schedules, injuries, travel, tactical changes and competition from younger players. It also means finding new ways to contribute when the body no longer responds exactly as it once did. That opens up several timely questions for journalists covering this final stage of their careers. Below, experts in sports science, biomechanics, psychology and sports business offer perspective on what it takes to compete across multiple World Cups—and what allows some players to remain influential long after their physical peak. What does it take physically to last this long? The World Cup lasts only a few weeks, but the careers behind it are built over thousands of training sessions and matches. For older players, the challenge is not simply staying fit. It is managing fatigue, recovering faster and avoiding the injury that could end the run. Hofstra exercise physiologist Katie Sell can speak to the less visible work behind these careers: sleep, hydration, nutrition, endurance and the tighter recovery window athletes face as they age. At the University of Delaware, Tom Kaminski brings expertise in soccer injuries, concussions and player safety. He can help explain how accumulated wear, repeated head impacts and return-to-play decisions influence whether a player can continue at the highest level. Texas Christian University’s Peter Weyand, an expert in sprint mechanics and running performance, can discuss what happens to speed and acceleration over time—and which physical qualities can still be protected through training. How do great players change their game? Longevity rarely comes from playing the same way forever. Ronaldo moved from the wing into a more central scoring role. Messi became more selective with his movement. Modrić continued to control matches through timing, positioning and awareness rather than physical dominance. These are not signs that aging players have stopped influencing games. They are signs that influence has changed. Carnegie Mellon biomechanics researcher Eni Halilaj can speak to how athletes adjust their movement patterns, conserve energy and reduce physical strain as they get older, while her colleague Eric Yttri, who studies motor control and decision-making, can explain how anticipation and experience allow veteran players to act earlier and more efficiently. Texas Christian University’s Peter Weyand can also add context on why older players often change positions, reduce repeated sprinting or become more selective about when they make high-intensity runs. Why keep coming back? By the time a player reaches a fourth or fifth World Cup, money and recognition are unlikely to be the main reasons for continuing. The harder question is what keeps an athlete committed after years of success, injuries and public scrutiny—especially when their role may be smaller than it once was. TCU sport psychology expert Robyn Trocchio can speak to motivation, focus and how accomplished athletes continue setting meaningful goals late in their careers. Hofstra’s Genevieve Weber can address performance anxiety, media pressure and the emotional weight of entering what may be a final international tournament. Georgia Southern sport psychologist Brandonn Harris can discuss resilience, confidence and the mental discipline required to recover from injury, disappointment and changing expectations. How should an aging superstar be judged? Goals are easy to count. Leadership, timing and influence are not. A veteran player may no longer dominate every match, but may still shape how teammates prepare, how opponents defend and how supporters respond. For coaches, that creates a difficult balance between reputation, current performance and what an experienced player brings in moments of pressure. At Emory University’s Goizueta Business School, Michael Lewis can discuss the value of global stars beyond the score sheet, including fan interest, brand strength and the attention they bring to a national team. Carnegie Mellon University’s Eric Yttri can speak to the on-field contributions that statistics often miss, including positioning, anticipation and decision-making. Texas Christian University’s Robyn Trocchio can address the leadership side of the story, including the difficult transition from automatic starter to mentor, substitute or situational player. A generation nearing the end The 2026 World Cup may be remembered not only for the players who emerged, but for the ones who were leaving. Ronaldo, Messi, Modrić, Neymar and De Bruyne have played through different tactical eras and alongside multiple generations of teammates. Their longevity was not built on talent alone. It required adaptation, recovery, discipline and a willingness to accept that staying great sometimes means becoming a different kind of player. For reporters, their careers offer a timely way to examine how elite athletes age—and why some remain relevant long after the normal limits of the game suggest they should.

The World Cup Beyond the Pitch

As the FIFA World Cup kicks off this month across Canada, the United States, and Mexico, global attention will focus on the action on the field. But some of the most important stories surrounding the tournament may happen beyond the final score. A recent Hofstra University article 'Hofstra History Professor Plays Key Role in 2026 World Cup Antidiscrimination Efforts' highlighted the work of historian and soccer scholar Brenda Elsey, who has been involved in efforts to address discrimination, inclusion, and fan culture issues connected to major international football events. Her work examines how race, gender, politics, identity, and social change intersect with the world's most popular sport. Dr. Brenda Elsey is a leading soccer scholar whose research explores the intersection of football, politics, gender, and society in Latin America. She has written extensively on the history and cultural impact of the sport, including its role in shaping identity, social movements, and international events. View her profile here For journalists, the 2026 World Cup presents opportunities to explore topics ranging from fan behaviour and inclusivity to the social and cultural impacts of hosting one of the largest sporting events on the planet. Questions around accessibility, equity, nationalism, gender representation, and the evolving role of sport in public life are expected to be part of the broader conversation surrounding the tournament. Brenda Elsey is a leading expert on the history, politics, and culture of soccer, with particular expertise in issues of gender, discrimination, and social justice in sport. Her research has examined how major international tournaments reflect broader societal trends and challenges, making her a valuable source for media looking to provide deeper context beyond match results and standings. Whether covering host cities, fan experiences, emerging controversies, or the legacy of the tournament, journalists seeking expert insight into the broader cultural significance of FIFA World Cup 2026 should consider connecting with Brenda Elsey.

Villanova Sports Business Expert Bret Myers, PhD, Previews the World Cup

Move over, American football fans. Hello, American… fútbol fans. Soon, the homes of NFL franchises like the Kansas City Chiefs, Dallas Cowboys and Philadelphia Eagles will play host to the 2026 FIFA World Cup, returning to the United States for the first time in 32 years. Through five-plus weeks of action-packed matches, soccer lovers from across the country—alongside more than 1.2 million international visitors—will flock to the nation’s metro areas to take in and celebrate the “beautiful game,” contributing to an atmosphere of revelry, drama and overall excitement. One person adding to the chorus of “olé”s will be Bret Myers, PhD, a sports business expert and professor of the practice of Management and Operations at Villanova University. Formerly a consultant with the Philadelphia Union, the Columbus Crew and Toronto FC, he recently shared some thoughts concerning the upcoming World Cup, its stateside appeal and the latest developments relating to the international contest. Q: The last World Cup game played on U.S. soil took place in 1994. How has soccer’s profile, and the American relationship with the sport, evolved since then? Dr. Myers: Undoubtedly, soccer has grown in this country since 1994 across all relevant metrics—namely, youth participation and academy development, domestic professional league development, TV and streaming viewership and the strength of the national team. A recent Economist survey even identified soccer as the third most popular sport in the country. A lot of that can be attributed to different demographic trends. Many Gen Xers grew up playing and following the sport, and Millennials and younger have become accustomed to engaging with it through social media. The popularity of EA Sports’ FIFA on gaming consoles has also helped with brand and player recognitions domestically. That said, while there have been many positive signs of growth, it is still a complex landscape in the U.S. Major League Soccer (MLS) has increased in quality over its 30 years of existence, but it has been challenging for them to carry the same kind of stature and appeal as the English Premier League, Mexico’s Liga MX, Spain’s La Liga and Germany’s Bundesliga—whose global broadcast rights and merchandising have attracted a lot of American fans due to higher standards of play and tradition. Q: How effective are promotions surrounding the World Cup? And do domestic professional and youth soccer teams benefit from the interest cultivated? DM: Honestly, it doesn’t take much to generate interest in World Cup games. Back in 1994, promotional efforts were arguably more important because soccer was in its infant stages of growth in the U.S., and the ticket prices were accordingly much lower, to spur demand. For this year’s World Cup, there’s an inverse problem. There is so much demand that FIFA is capitalizing with high ticket prices, unfortunately pricing out a lot of avid soccer fans. As for youth soccer and MLS, I don’t see a direct relationship between the promotional effort for the World Cup and the dynamics there. Participation in youth soccer is already high, and it has become a very competitive landscape with a lot of different tiers across multiple age groups, male and female. Meanwhile, MLS interest and ticket sales really boil down to the talent the league attracts. For instance, Lionel Messi’s decision to sign with Inter Miami was an enormous lift factor, bumping up attendance levels and increasing revenue levels for tickets, sponsorships and broadcast rights. Q: This year’s competition marks the first that will feature 48 teams, up from 32 previously. Could you speak about the logic and potential benefits of boosting the number of participants? DM: With the expansion of the World Cup field, there are certainly revenue benefits that come with more matches, more ticket sales, more consumption by fans and more viewership potential. That is the business side of things. From a competition standpoint, the clear beneficiaries are the smaller nations from less competitive continents that get the opportunity to participate, like Curaçao and Cape Verde. These teams are not going to win the World Cup, but they will make things interesting at times in the group phase, as there is always the potential for a surprise knockout or qualification for the next stage. Q: As Sports Illustrated reports, a series of rule changes have been put into effect for the World Cup to “maximize fairness and eliminate the dark arts.” Do you see any of these tweaks meaningfully impacting the product on the pitch? DM: While I think it’s good that FIFA is continuing to examine how to make the game safer, fairer and more exciting, I don’t think the World Cup is the place to experiment. Players should have the chance to get accustomed to rule changes during other types of competitions, so that they can better understand how they are being enforced. That said, in the long term, I think the proposed changes [aimed at preventing time-wasting and feigned injuries] will impact the sport positively. On-field theatrics compromise the integrity of the game, and most fans pick up on it and don’t appreciate it. Q: What elements of the upcoming tourney have you most excited? Are there any particular trends or stories you suggest fans track? DM: Personally, I’m satisfied to see that certain players are defying the traditional notion of an “age curve.” Many countries have players over 35 on their roster, with some of the bigger names being Messi (38), Cristiano Ronaldo (41) and U.S. team captain Tim Ream (38). It is also interesting to see the other end of the spectrum, with emerging talents like Spain’s Lamine Yamal (18) and Brazil’s Estêvão (19). With all the “GOATs” and “young bucks,” it isn’t exactly clear who is effectively the best player in the world right now. It’ll be interesting to see who emerges at the end of the World Cup to stake a claim.

Expert Insights: Want More Engagement? Eliminate the Barriers.

Anyone born in the 70’s or earlier will probably remember it well. Time was when playing any kind of video game meant physically disporting yourself to the local arcade—a twilight zone of flashing neon, electronic beeps and bops, and the clink of quarters hitting the slot. As technology advanced, the videogame came to you. Home consoles and TV stations rigged with joysticks duly became the mainstay of gaming. The Atari 2600 brought the arcade experience into dens all over the US; Pac-Man, Space Invaders, and Asteroids now at the fingertips of a generation of games who no longer needed to leave home to play. Fast forward to the era of smart phones and hi-tech, and gaming has evolved again. Today, Fortnite, Minecraft, and The Legend of Zelda can accompany you pretty much anywhere—onto a train or a bus, into the canteen at work or school, or under the covers at 2am. In our always-on, on-demand world, video gaming increasingly meets players where they are; a play-anywhere, digital user experience that empowers individuals to engage with their game of choice wherever they are, whenever it suits, and via whatever platform they prefer, desktop or mobile. For users, the benefits seem clear. But what about game producers? As availability expands to new channels and platforms, how does it change user behavior? Does it deepen engagement or does cross-platform continuity simply end up redistributing play—the addition of each new platform shifting players away from, and effectively cannibalizing, existing channels? It’s a conundrum, and not just for video game producers. Retailers, bankers, insurance firms, media, and hospitality providers—anyone with an online-first approach looking to meet their customers wherever they are—should also be cognizant of the potential downsides of channel expansion in the digital space. Weighing in here is research by Professor of Marketing and expert in the intersection of sports and cultural analytics and marketing Michael Lewis. Together with Wooyong Jo of Purdue, Lewis looks at the impact of omni-channel strategy on videogames—a proxy, he says, for other sectors and industries. What they find is critical for marketers and decision-makers in any context or business setting. Increasing the digital touchpoints between your product and customers does impact behavior—but the net results are overwhelmingly positive. Video game players play more, they spend more frequently, and they integrate gameplay more deeply into their everyday lives. In other words, the investment pays off. And the dividends in customer engagement are serious. Switching to the Switch To unpack all of this, Lewis and Jo partnered with a large US video game publisher to analyze player-level behavioral data for one its major titles in the Multiplayer Online Battle Arena, or MOBA genre. Players form teams and compete to destroy opposing team’s bases, selecting a character from a set of 100+ options. Revenue for the publisher comes from a “freemium” business model—users can make voluntary purchases to unlock new characters or buy cosmetic enhancements. These purchases are geared toward enhancing the gaming experience but don’t affect competitive outcomes, making them a critical measure of engagement. In 2019, the game was released for the Nintendo Switch, which can be docked in home consoles but is most commonly used as a mobile, hand-held device. PC players were given the option to download this new version and continue gameplay seamlessly using their existing accounts. Analyzing player behavior before and after the adoption of the new Switch platform, Lewis and Jo were able to zoom in on some critical measures of user engagement including game usage or the total number of matches played, in-game spending—what, when and how much players spent—and player inactivity or churn. “We were able to really get into player behavior over time, and what happens when you introduce the Switch option and remove the constraints of having to play in one place—the home or gaming PC,” says Lewis. “What happens when you make it possible for players to access the game they love while they’re commuting or on their lunchbreak?” Plenty, it turns out. Mobile access: gameplay, spending and churn Crunching the data, Lewis and Jo find that mobile access dramatically increases gameplay. Players who adopted the Switch version played approximately 31% more games than before—a dramatic uptick that underscores how flexibility gains translate into new opportunities to play and engage. And that’s not all. Lewis and Jo also find that gameplay becomes less concentrated within narrow windows—after school or work, say—and is now more spread out across the day, the result of the “ubiquity effect,” says Lewis. “Take away the constraints of having to be in a fixed location and you see players adding additional play sessions. Interestingly though, we don’t find any adverse effect on PC gaming. Players are simply playing more, and playing longer, rather than replacing PC time.” Then there’s in-game purchasing. MOBA-type games typically give players the option to voluntarily buy modifications for characters, known as “skins.” These skins are cosmetic enhancements: new armor, costumes, skill animations or effects. Crucially, these kinds of purchases don’t advance players to new levels of success in the game. Instead, they are used for personalization—to demonstrate status or to celebrate an in-game event. Lewis and Jo find that mobile adopters make more frequent in-game purchases. While the overall total doesn’t increase materially, these players are spending small amounts, more often—almost 7% more frequently than before. This makes intuitive sense, says Lewis. If players are logging in more often, they have more opportunities to feel inspired to want to spend on skins. But there’s another factor that may be at work. “With this kind of in-game purchasing, it’s likely that a lot of it is about credibility. When you buy a skin or a character pack, it’s like you have more aura within the game; you want to signal something to other players and let yourself be known. And this is more than just monetary, it’s about a deeper kind of engagement,” says Lewis. “It’s possible that as mobile access makes the game more of a frequent companion, as the rate of play increases, there’s this effect that players fall deeper into the community—their engagement deepens even more.” Interestingly, the shift to mobile access had the most significant impact precisely on those players whose pre-Switch in-game purchasing was lowest. These users, who were arguably most likely to disengage and drift away from the game, became significantly more active once the hand-held option became available. “If you have players spending less and less inside the game, the intuition is that these are the customers you are most at risk of losing,” says Lewis. “Bringing in the Switch has seen these customers—those more prone to churn—actively reengage with the game, maybe because they have greater propensity for the mobile version.” Either way, this should be a particularly interesting finding for marketers, he adds; retaining existing users is typically cheaper than attracting new ones. “The evidence suggests that mobile access can serve not only as a growth strategy, but also a defensive one if it helps keep marginal users engaged; those who might otherwise have detached from the product altogether.” Help Them Switch So far, so encouraging. There is one potential downside to porting a game or online product to a new channel, however, and that is usability. Lewis and Jo find that players who switched between platforms experience a slight, initial decline in in-game performance—likely because of differences in the control systems between devices. Players who’ve been using keyboard and mouse controls may need time to adapt to hand-held controllers. To mitigate this, he and Jo suggest that producers could offer tutorials or introductory gameplay modes that accelerate the learning curve as users adjust to the new interface. In most cases, usability should be factored in as an additional, hidden cost, when developers and organizations are contemplating investing in more online customer touchpoints. “Expanding your online channels will always have some cost. Taking a game from one platform and porting it to another one isn’t free, so you will want to anticipate the hurdles, even as you weigh up the clear benefits,” says Lewis. “The key is to make sure you protect your users. With things like video games, you want to think about how to guide or upskill your players, maybe have them play bots at first to ramp up their capabilities. Whenever you create a new channel that has a different operating system from the user’s perspective, you’re probably going to want to provide some aid to your fan community.” The benefits of omni-channel access should always be weighted against the costs involved, counsels Lewis. Even so, today’s competitive pressures—the seemingly inexorable march of technological innovation and evolving user expectations—are likely to make platform expansion unavoidable for most online businesses. In the world of video gaming, as major franchises release new products across multiple platforms, and player preferences become more sophisticated, companies may simply have to adopt similar strategies to remain competitive. “As everyone else invests in the same new technologies, you almost have to do the same—just as a matter of doing business,” says Lewis. “If you are launching a video game, you’ve got to compete with whatever Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto are doing. You can’t just tell your players they can only engage on one platform. The competition is continuously raising the stakes just in terms of the bare minimum.” Building Fandom: the Connective Cultural Tissue More broadly, Lewis and Jo’s findings speak to how human beings form communities of shared passion around business entities and, perhaps more compellingly, around cultural phenomena: video games, for sure, but also sports teams, music, films, comic books, fashion, and more. Understanding the mechanisms that drive and deepen engagement sheds more light on what Lewis calls the “connective cultural tissue of fandom: ”the powerful social bonds, camaraderie, and shared identity that connect people to cultural entities and to each other. Fandom, he argues, is the “key to our world.” Understanding fan behavior is critical to understanding how it is that games, brands, sporting teams, or politics forge communities built on shared passion. “Whatever your organization or business is, you are going to be interested in driving passion. You want people to engage and love what you do. What we’re looking at in this study is a building block towards understanding how cultural entities fit into consumers’ lives, and how eliminating barriers helps to expand communities and drive relationships—extending reach and engagement by weaving cultural experiences more deeply into everyday life.” The real challenge in front of organizations, be they video game producers or online retailers, says Lewis, is to give their product the kind of “cultural meaning” that creates fans—and not just users. “When you think about the behavior of fans, the level of passion and engagement that exists around cultural phenomena—whatever they are from video games to FIFA, the English Football League to the Super Bowl, Taylor Swift to the Republican Party—that’s where you see the passion that really drives the world. And that to me, is critical in understanding how business works, how societies function, and how our world evolves.”

Beyond the field: New research highlights how NIL is reshaping college athlete identity

In an era of name, image and likeness, or NIL, many college athletes are thinking differently about who they are — seeing themselves not just as competitors or students, but also as influencers with distinct voices and causes, according to a new study from the University of Florida. Molly Harry, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the Department of Sport Management at the UF College of Health and Human Performance, surveyed 200 athletes from 21 Power Four universities to better understand how NIL, which refers to the rights of college athletes to earn money through endorsements, sponsorships, social media promotions and other commercial opportunities, has impacted the way athletes perceive their roles and identities. “Historically, we’ve viewed them (college athletes) through the lens of athletics or academics, but they’re daughters, brothers, role models, and increasingly, they’re now cultivating public personas and marketing skills.” —Molly Harry, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the Department of Sport Management The findings, published Friday in the Sociology of Sport Journal, reveal a growing recognition among athletes that they are more than the two-dimensional “student-athlete” model that is traditionally used in research and policy. “With the shift in NIL policies, athletes are starting to develop roles and identities related to that of the influencer,” Harry said. “Historically, we’ve viewed them through the lens of athletics or academics, but they’re daughters, brothers, role models, and increasingly, they’re now cultivating public personas and marketing skills.” Through survey responses across seven major sports — football, baseball, men’s and women’s basketball, gymnastics, volleyball and softball — Harry and UF doctoral student Hannah Kloetzer examined athletes' engagement with NIL opportunities, as well as the personal sacrifices they made to pursue them. They found that many athletes now view NIL as a platform to promote causes they care about, build connections with their communities and explore career pathways after college. One softball player described the value of NIL in a way that highlights the broader impact: “It’s been great to feel seen and have your hard work in a sport help in other parts of life. It’s really nice to use NIL on a resume as marketing experience.” Athletes surveyed said they found deals not just with big-name brands, but more often with local businesses like restaurants, boutiques and community partners. This entrepreneurial approach often required initiative and personal outreach, something many athletes had to learn on their own. “Some athletes told us they felt lost when trying to navigate NIL,” Harry said. “Others shared how they reached out to local businesses or organized their own camps.” One particularly striking finding, Harry said, was that some athletes were making athletic sacrifices — like spending less time training — to pursue NIL work, a shift that underscores the importance of these opportunities. Harry stressed that while no one reported skipping practices, athletes did acknowledge shifting their priorities to make room for NIL-related endeavors. “If you’re willing to give up something in your athletic routine, that speaks volumes about how central NIL — and influencer identities — could become for some athletes,” she said. Another key insight: football players of color from low socioeconomic backgrounds were most likely to self-identify as influencers. This emerging pattern stands in contrast to perceived broader trends in the social media world. “That was one of the most fascinating takeaways,” Harry said. “We have this unique subset of influencers — college football athletes — that are starting to enter this space.” Harry’s research builds on a growing conversation in the academic community about the evolving identity of college athletes. A few conceptual pieces have previously proposed the idea of a “student-athlete-influencer,” but Harry’s team is one of the first to gather empirical data to back it up. This new perspective has broad implications for how universities and organizations like the NCAA support college athletes, both during their playing years and as they prepare for life after sport. “As fans, we often see athletes as commodities on the field,” Harry said. “But they’re humans first, and they’re starting to recognize their own value and tap into their potential beyond the playing field.” In addition to academic and athletic support, Harry believes universities should invest in more targeted resources tailored to influencer pressures, like mentorship opportunities and training that goes beyond basic social media etiquette. “Athletes who take on influencer roles may deal with unique stressors, whether it’s comparing engagement numbers or coping with public scrutiny,” she said. “It would be valuable to provide opportunities where athlete-influencers can support each other, share strategies and protect their mental health.” A football player who participated in the study summed up the broader potential of NIL: “I’m very appreciative of NIL opportunities and the ability to continue to grow my camp and greater brand outside of my football program.” Looking ahead, Harry plans to explore this evolving identity through more qualitative research, with a focus on what it truly means to be an “influencer” in the context of college athletics. “Athletes are more than football players. They are more than swimmers,” she said. “They are people who we walk with on our college campuses, and they are people who bring value to our society in a host of ways.”

Boxing Day Explained: From Acts of Charity to a Global Cultural Tradition

Boxing Day may be best known today for shopping deals, leftover turkey sandwiches, and the collective decision to stay in pyjamas as long as possible. But its origins are far richer — rooted in charity, social responsibility, and long-standing cultural tradition. Observed on December 26, Boxing Day has evolved over centuries from a day of giving into a uniquely modern mix of generosity, sport, family, and commerce. Where Boxing Day Began The origins of Boxing Day trace back to medieval Britain. Traditionally, it was the day when: Churches opened alms boxes to distribute donations to the poor Employers gave servants and tradespeople “Christmas boxes” containing money, food, or gifts Workers who served households on Christmas Day were finally given time off to celebrate with their own families At its core, Boxing Day recognized service, labour, and the idea that generosity should extend beyond Christmas Day itself. A Day for Workers, Not Just Celebrations Historically, Boxing Day acknowledged the contributions of workers — from domestic staff to tradespeople — reinforcing values of gratitude, fairness, and shared prosperity. Long before modern labour standards, it created a structured moment for appreciation and rest. How Boxing Day Is Celebrated Around the World Today While its charitable roots remain, Boxing Day traditions vary by region: United Kingdom A public holiday Known for major football matches, horse racing, and community events A blend of tradition, sport, and post-Christmas relaxation Canada A statutory holiday in several provinces Widely associated with retail sales, winter recreation, and family gatherings Increasingly viewed as a day to unwind, travel, or spend time outdoors Australia & New Zealand Celebrated during summer Defined by outdoor events, including cricket and sailing A festive, recreational extension of Christmas rather than a recovery day United States Not an official holiday, but culturally familiar December 26 is widely marked by after-Christmas sales, professional sports viewing, and end-of-year charitable giving Many American traditions - holiday bonuses, tipping service workers, and year-end donations - closely mirror Boxing Day’s original emphasis on gratitude and generosity Beyond the Commonwealth In several European countries, December 26 is observed as St. Stephen’s Day, carrying its own religious and cultural significance From Charity to Commerce: A Modern Shift Over time, Boxing Day became synonymous with retail — driven by post-holiday inventory cycles and consumer demand. While some argue this shift has overshadowed its charitable origins, others see it as an evolution rather than a replacement. Notably, many volunteer initiatives and charitable campaigns continue to peak on or around December 26, reconnecting the day with its philanthropic foundation. Story Angles for Journalists How Boxing Day evolved differently across cultures Why Boxing Day is a holiday in some countries but not others The economic impact of December 26 retail activity Boxing Day and labour history How sport became a defining Boxing Day tradition Why generosity peaks at year’s end Why Boxing Day Still Matters Boxing Day sits between celebration and renewal — a moment to acknowledge service, extend generosity, and reset before the new year. Its global staying power lies in its adaptability, reflecting the values and rhythms of the societies that observe it Find your expert here: www.expertfile.com

LSU Experts Break Down Artificial Intelligence Boom Behind Holiday Shopping Trends

Consumers are increasingly turning to artificial intelligence tools for holiday shopping—especially Gen Z shoppers, who are using platforms like ChatGPT and social media not only for gift inspiration but also to find the best prices. Andrew Schwarz, professor in the LSU Stephenson Department of Entrepreneurship & Information Systems, and Dan Rice, associate professor and Director of the E. J. Ourso College of Business Behavioral Research Lab, share their insights on this emerging trend. AI is the new front door for search: Schwarz: We’re seeing a fundamental change in how consumers find information. Instead of browsing multiple pages of results, users—especially Gen Z—are skipping to conversational AI for curated answers. That dramatically shortens the shopping journey. For years, companies optimized for SEO to appear on the first page of Google; now they’ll have to think about how their products surface in AI-generated recommendations. This may lead to a new form of “AIO”—AI Information Optimization—where retailers tailor product descriptions, metadata, and partnerships specifically for AI visibility. The companies that adapt early will have a distinct advantage in capturing consumer attention. Rice: This issue of people being satisfied with the AI results (like a summary at the top of the Google results) and then not clicking on any of the paid or organic links leads to a huge increase in what we call “zero click search” (for obvious reasons). For some providers, this is leading to significant drops in web traffic from search results, which can be disconcerting due to the potential loss of leads. However, to Andrew’s point of shortening the journey, it means that the consumers who do come through are much more likely to buy (quickly) because they are “better” leads. This translates to seemingly paradoxical situations for providers: they see drops in click-through rates and visitors/leads, yet revenue increases because the visitors are “better.”  There is a rise in personalized shopping journeys: Schwarz: AI essentially acts as a personal shopper—one that can instantly analyze preferences, budget, personality traits, or past behavior to produce tailored gift lists. This shifts power toward “delegated decision-making,” in which consumers allow AI to narrow their choices. Younger consumers are already comfortable outsourcing this cognitive load. However, as ads enter the picture, these personalized journeys could be shaped by incentives that aren’t always transparent. That creates a new responsibility for platforms to disclose when suggestions are sponsored and for users to develop a more critical lens when interacting with AI-driven recommendations. Rice: This is also a great point. The “tools” marketers use to attract customers are constantly evolving, but this seems in many ways to be the next iteration of the Amazon.com suggestions that you find at the bottom of the product page for something you click on when searching Amazon (“buy all x for $” or “consumers also looked at…,” etc.), based on past histories of search and purchase, etc. One of the main differences is that you can now create virtually limitless ways to compare products, making comparisons less taxing (reducing cognitive load and stress), which may, in some cases, increase the likelihood of purchase. These idiosyncratic comparisons and prompts lead to the truly unique journeys Andrew is discussing. You no longer have to be beholden to a retailer-specified price range. You could choose your own, or instead ask an AI to list the products representing the best “value” based on consumer reviews, perhaps by asking to list the top ten products by cost per star rating, etc.  Advertising is becoming more subtle and conversational: Schwarz: With ads woven directly into AI responses, the traditional boundary between content and advertising blurs. Instead of banner ads, pop-ups, or clearly labeled sponsored posts, recommendations in a conversational thread may feel more like advice than marketing. This has enormous implications for consumer trust. Retailers will likely see higher engagement through these context-aware ad placements, but regulatory scrutiny may also increase as policymakers evaluate how clearly sponsored content is identified. The risk is that advertising becomes invisible—something both platform designers and regulators will need to monitor carefully. Rice: This is definitely true. I was recently exploring an AI-based tool for choosing downhill skis, but the tool was subtly provided by a single ski brand. I’m not sure the distribution of ski brands covered was truly delivering the “best overall fit” for a potential buyer, rather than the best possible ski in that brand. At least in that case, it was somewhat disclosed. It does, however, become an issue if consumers feel misled, but they’d have to notice it first. Still, the advantages are big for retailers, and the numbers don't lie. According to some preliminary Black Friday data, shoppers using an AI assistant were 60% more likely to make a purchase.  Schwarz: This shift is going to reshape multiple layers of the retail ecosystem: Retailers will need to rethink how they show up in AI-driven environments. Traditional SEO, ad bids, and social media strategies won’t be enough. Partnerships with AI platforms may become as important as being carried by major retailers today. Because AI tools can instantly compare prices across dozens of retailers, consumers will become more price-sensitive. Retailers may face increasing pressure to offer competitive pricing or unique value propositions, as AI reduces friction in comparison shopping. Retailers who integrate AI into their own websites—chat-based shopping assistants, personalized gift advisors, automated bundling—will gain an edge. Consumers are increasingly expecting conversational interfaces, and companies that delay will quickly feel outdated. As AI tools influence purchasing decisions, consumers and regulators alike will demand clarity around how recommendations are generated. Retailers will need to navigate this carefully to maintain What I think we are going to see accelerate as we move forward: AI-powered concierge shopping will become mainstream. Within a couple of years, using AI to generate shopping lists, compare prices, and find deals will be as common as using Amazon today. Retailers will create AI-specific marketing strategies. Instead of optimizing for keywords, they’ll optimize for prompts: how consumers might ask for products and how an AI system interprets those requests. More platforms will introduce advertising into AI models. ChatGPT is simply the first mover. Once the revenue potential becomes clear, others will follow with their own ad integrations. Greater scrutiny from policymakers. As conversational advertising grows, transparency rules and labeling requirements will almost certainly. A new era of “conversational commerce.” Buying directly through AI—“ChatGPT, order this for me”—will become increasingly common, merging search, recommendation, and transaction into a single seamless experience. I can speak to this on a personal level.  My college-aged son is interested in college football, and I wanted to get him a streaming subscription to watch the games.  However, the football landscape is fragmented across multiple, expensive platforms. I asked ChatGPT to generate a series of options. Hulu is $100/month for Live TV, but ChatGPT recommended a combination of ESPN+, Peacock, and Paramount+ for $400/year and identified which conferences would not be covered.  What would have taken me hours only took me a few minutes! Rice: On the other hand, AI isn’t infallible, and it can lead to sub-optimal results, hallucinations, and questionable recommendations. From my recent ski shopping experience, I encountered several pitfalls. First, for very specific questions about a specific model, I sometimes received answers for a different ski model in the same brand, or for a different ski altogether, which was not particularly helpful, or specs I knew were just plain wrong. Secondly, regarding Andrew’s point about the conversational tone, I asked questions intended to push the limits of what could be considered reliable. For example, I asked the AI to describe the difference in “feel” of the ski for the skier among several models and brands. While the AI gave very detailed and plausible comparisons that were very much like an in-store discussion with a salesperson or area expert, I’m not sure I fully trust when an AI tells me that you can really feel the power of a ski push you out of a turn, this ski has great edge hold, etc. It sounds great, but where is the AI sourcing this information? I’m not convinced it’s fully accurate. It also seems we’re starting to see Google shift toward a more AI-centric approach (e.g., AI summaries and full AI Mode). At the same time, we’re also starting to see AI migrate closer to Google as people use it for product-related chats, and companies like Amazon and Walmart have developed their own AI that is specifically focused on the consumer experience. I can’t imagine it will be long before companies like OpenAI and their competitors start “selling influence” in AI discussions to monetize the influence their engines will have.  

Want a Better Thanksgiving? Start With a Screen Break

For many families, Thanksgiving weekend has quietly become a four-day screen marathon: football, streaming, shopping, scrolling through sales, and group chats buzzing in the background. Personal development coach Mark Diamond has spent decades seeing what happens when people take a different approach. After running a tech-free camp for 25 years, he’s watched kids and adults transform when phones disappear and the outdoors becomes the main event. “You can actually feel nervous systems reset,” he says. “People sleep better, they laugh more, and they have the kinds of conversations that just don’t happen when everyone’s half-present on their devices.” Diamond believes Thanksgiving is one of the easiest times of year to test what he’s learned - without asking anyone to give up the game or the parade. “You don’t have to cancel screens,” he says. “You just have to make sure they’re not the only thing you remember about the weekend.” He suggests families experiment with one simple offline tradition they can repeat every year: Everyone helps with the meal - put on some good music and try to learn to cook! Hear family stories - instead of talking about trending videos, have some questions ready to learn about the lives of relatives you don't see so often. A tech-free walk before or after dinner - leave phones at home or in pockets on airplane mode. An outdoor game (even in colder weather) - touch football, a scavenger hunt for younger kids, or a quick “around the block” relay. A “no scroll, just snap” rule - photos are fine, but posting and scrolling wait until the next day. When people are already together, Diamond notes, it’s actually easier to introduce new traditions. “You can say, ‘This year, let’s try 30 minutes of no screens while we do X.’ It feels like a shared experiment, not a punishment.” The real payoff, he says, isn’t just fewer hours online. It’s the memories and inside jokes that come from doing something real together, not just watching the same screen side by side. “We’re not going to remember every highlight reel or Black Friday deal,” Diamond says. “We remember the time we got caught in the rain on a walk, or when somebody’s throw went wildly off course and everyone burst out laughing.” In his coaching work, Diamond helps people who feel “glued to their phones” design lives where brief, meaningful offline moments are built in — starting with accessible opportunities like holiday weekends. “Thanksgiving is a perfect low-stakes test. If one tiny offline tradition makes the day feel better, that’s powerful feedback. You can carry that forward into December, and into the new year.” About the Expert Mark Diamond is a personal development coach and founder of a long-running tech-free camp. He focuses on outdoor wellness, sustainable behavior change, and helping people reconnect to happiness and real-world experiences in an age of constant screens. Mark is part of the Offline.now expert directory, contributing to the community supporting better parental modelling for device use.