Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Aston University celebrates becoming a University of Sanctuary with official event

Aston University officially celebrated becoming a University of Sanctuary with an event held on 16 May for all those who contributed to achieving this status. The University was awarded University of Sanctuary status in December 2022, joining a network of higher education institutions across the UK working to develop support for those displaced by humanitarian crises. The celebration was hosted by Aston University Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive, Professor Aleks Subic. Guests included Councillor John Cotton, Birmingham City Council Cabinet member for Social Justice, Community Safety and Equalities, who made a special award presentation. The event programme also included a performance by poet Loraine Masiya Mponela, who herself was an asylum seeker and conversations with recipients of Ernest Edward Scholarships, a sanctuary scholarship scheme for students who have sought refuge in the UK. The scheme was set up by Aston University in 2022 due to a generous donation by prominent businessperson Matthew Crummack. Universities of Sanctuary is an initiative to recognise and celebrate the good practice of institutions welcoming people seeking sanctuary through facilitated access to higher education, supporting local refugee communities and taking an active role in learning about the issues and obstacles faced by this group in pursuing university-level education. Professor Aleks Subic, Vice-Chancellor and Chief Executive of Aston University, said: “I am delighted to have had this opportunity to host a celebration event to thank everyone who has helped us achieve the University of Sanctuary status. “Aston University is committed to supporting people seeking sanctuary through its efforts to deepen our understanding of the issues surrounding asylum seekers and refugees, providing a welcoming environment for sanctuary students, and working with individuals and communities beyond the campus to promote the values and principles of sanctuary. “Being a University of Sanctuary is key to our Civic Agreement: our commitment to make Birmingham a better place for everyone who lives, works, and studies here. Birmingham." Councillor John Cotton, Birmingham City Council Cabinet member for Social Justice, Community Safety and Equalities, said: “Birmingham is proud to be a City of Sanctuary, with its long history of offering refuge to those fleeing war, persecution and tyranny around the globe. In these troubled times, standing up for the principles of sanctuary and refuge is more important than ever. “I’m delighted that Aston University has joined the family of Universities of Sanctuary and is one of the many important institutions in our city that actively extends the hand of friendship to those seeking refuge and the chance to rebuild their lives here in Birmingham.”

Aston University predicted as one of the UK’s leading centres for lab-made meat

• Aston University named as one of the UK’s leaders in the potential future of food • Highlighted for research, teaching, public outreach, industry links and location • Process uses cells taken from animals via biopsy, so doesn’t involve slaughter. Aston University has been named as one of the UK’s leading lights in what is predicted to be the future of food - lab-made meat. The University is one of 17 higher education institutions that are expected to play a major role in the development of cultivated meat. Cultivated or lab-grown meat is made from cells taken from animals via biopsy. The cells are used to create meat which doesn’t involve the slaughter of animals. The process promises fewer greenhouse gases and a decrease in land required for its production compared to traditional livestock. The list of universities has been compiled by Cellular Agriculture UK, a non-profit organisation which promotes the UK’s so-called ‘cell-ag’ sector. Aston University is one of five institutions they chose to highlight in their report Mapping the potential for UK universities to become research and teaching hubs for cellular agriculture. Aston University is described in the report as having potential to be an anchor institution for cellular agriculture, and was highlighted for its research and teaching, public outreach work, links with emerging industry and its central location. Dr Eirini Theodosiou, senior lecturer in the School of lnfrastructure and Sustainable Engineering, focuses on ways to produce enough cell mass to create the meat. She said: “This is still a relatively new food technology. Unlike many others we work on biomaterials for microcarriers/scaffolds for cultivated meat, which puts us in a very strong position, in the UK at least.” Meanwhile Dr Jason Thomas’ work explores the psychology behind supporting people to accept lab-made food. Although many people are willing to try it, there are still many who are reluctant to do so. A recent study of the US and UK found that 35% of meat eaters and 55% of vegetarians claimed they were too disgusted by the idea of cultured meat to even try it. A key goal of his research is how to support people to not just try it but to integrate it into their diet. Dr Thomas said: “We are interested in finding out what factors can influence consumer purchase of and consumption of lab-made meat.” “The engineering/psychology link is one of our USPs and is something Aston University can capitalise on; learning what the consumer wants from cultivated meat, and what would encourage them to consume it, using psychological science, and then incorporating this directly into the production process via engineering. “It is a relatively new food technology, and much work still needs to be done to make it affordable, acceptable and on a massive scale, but it could easily end up being one of the most transformative new foods of the 21st century.”

But do they work? Researchers investigate effectiveness of lactation cookies on human milk production

Ana Palacios’ interview on “Eagle Eye View,” the official podcast of Georgia Southern University. Palacios discusses her research and how being a mom motivated her. Several esteemed nutrition researchers collaborated on “Effectiveness of Lactation Cookies on Human Milk Production Rates: A Randomized Controlled Trial,” which was recently published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. David B. Allison, Ph.D., dean of the Indiana University School of Public Health-Bloomington (SPH-B), is among the researchers who conducted a one-month, randomized controlled trial of lactating parents of healthy babies in the same age range. Their findings revealed no evidence for an effect of consuming lactation cookies on human milk production. “Too often in the field of nutrition and food, strong beliefs—sometimes even well-reasoned conjectures based upon some scientific knowledge—are mistaken for demonstrated facts,” Allison said. “Conjecture is good, but knowing is better. We come to know about the effects of nutrition and dietary supplements through rigorous, randomized, controlled trials. Having conducted such a study on lactation cookies, we found no evidence for their effectiveness. “This does not mean that it is impossible for any lactation cookie to affect human milk production,” he continued. “This study does suggest that the cookies we studied—under the conditions we studied them—have no discernible effect. The burden of proof seems to now be on those who claim there is an effect.” The study followed 176 U.S. parents who were exclusively breastfeeding healthy two-month-old babies. One group of parents was provided a serving of commercially available lactation cookies to consume daily for a month; the other group of parents ate a serving of conventional cookies not designed to increase lactation, each day for a month. Through a weekly survey, parents reported the quantity of milk they produced after following a validated milk expression protocol using a hospital-grade breast pump, providing data that were analyzed by both the study authors and an independent statistician. These data demonstrated that the impact of consuming lactation cookies did not have a significant effect on how much milk was actually produced or perceived to be produced by the lactating parents. The authors assert that consumers should be cautious when considering the potential effect of this product, or any food and/or supplement that promotes health-promoting benefits without published, peer-reviewed scientific evidence to support its claims. As the researchers noted, these lactation cookies can contain substantial calories and sugars, which could affect postpartum weight loss efforts and related health issues. “Despite being a physician and nutrition scientist focused on early-life nutrition, I still remember how difficult breastfeeding was for me with both of my children,” said study lead author Ana M. Palacios, MD, Ph.D., assistant professor, Department of Health Policy and Community Health, Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health at Georgia Southern University. “Our research highlights that lactation cookies, which include added sugars and saturated fat, may not have the said purported benefits of increasing milk production. Purchasing lactation cookies to increase milk production may pose an unnecessary cost and may have additional implications for parents, such as limiting post-pregnancy weight loss and reducing consumption of healthier foods. More research is needed to better understand what foods and nutrients can best help increase milk supply in diverse populations.” The full article, along with the list of contributing authors, is available by simply clicking the article below: Interested in learning more? For more information about this research or to speak with Ana M. Palacios — simply reach out to Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at  jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.

Gene Editing Institute Opens a Unique Learning Lab for High School and College Students

Free program uses CRISPR in a Box™ toolkit to teach the power of gene editing To inspire the next generation of students to pursue careers in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) and learn about the power of genomic science, ChristianaCare’s Gene Editing Institute has launched a new Learning Lab on its premises that offers educational programming about revolutionary CRISPR gene editing technology. Located next to the Gene Editing Institute’s lab on the University of Delaware’s STAR Campus, the Learning Lab is a physical space that provides an immersive field trip experience for upper-level high school students and college undergraduates who may not have access at their schools to a laboratory to conduct gene editing experiments. There is no cost for schools to use the lab or for the materials to conduct the experiment. The Gene Editing Institute wants to ensure that all schools have equal opportunity to participate in educational programming at the lab. Students using the lab can perform a gene editing experiment in a single day using the Gene Editing Institute’s innovative CRISPR in a Box™ educational toolkit. All materials in the kit are safe, synthetic materials, and allow students to perform CRISPR gene editing with non-infectious E. coli bacteria. They will be able to see an appearance change indicating gene editing has occurred at the end of their experiment. “Students around the country, no matter where they go to school, have the potential to be scientists, researchers and laboratory technicians,” said Eric Kmiec, Ph.D., executive director and chief scientific officer of ChristianaCare’s Gene Editing Institute. “Our hope is that by creating access and space for students to explore, we can inspire the next generation of students to pursue STEM careers. The Learning Lab allows us to help cultivate the next generation of genetic scientists and strengthen Delaware and our region as a leader in biotechnology.” Education Program Manager Amanda Hewes, MS, developed the Learning Lab after noticing a problem that was undercutting the opportunities of teachers to bring gene editing experiments into the classroom — a lack of space and equipment. Amanda Hewes, education program coordinator, assists students from Wilmington Charter School with their samples of DNA during a Learning Lab experiment. “We don’t want anything to hinder the way students learn about CRISPR gene editing,” Hewes said. “If a student feels like there are too many steps, or a teacher doesn’t have an essential piece of equipment, then we’ve lost an opportunity to bring the next generation of scientists into the lab. We’re striving to break down as many barriers as possible for students.” Learning real-world applications of gene editing The Learning Lab also allows students to speak directly with experts in the field about careers in biotechnology and gene editing as they learn the difference between such things as phenotypic and genotypic readouts in their gene editing experiments. This gives students the chance to ask about the real-world application of genome experiments in a research lab. It also lets them think about their place in a lab setting. “I’ve never been in an actual lab setting before,” said Shiloh Lee, a junior at the Charter School of Wilmington, at a recent class. “I think it is very, very cool to be able to experience it.” “I’ve learned a lot of new skills with the micropipetting,” said Pauline Zhuang, a senior at The Charter School of Wilmington. “We don’t have the same resources at our school. The CRISPR in a Box is such a great resource. My classmates and I have been able to experience, firsthand, what it is like to actually do gene editing.” Through the program, the Gene Editing Institute hopes to educate 1,000 students by spring 2024. Currently, the lab is on track to engage more than 200 students by the end of the spring 2023 semester. CRISPR stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, which are the hallmark of a bacterial defense system that forms the basis for CRISPR-Cas 9 genome editing technology. The CRISPR technology enables researchers to modify genes in living cells and organisms and may make it possible to correct mutations at precise locations in the human genome in order to treat genetic causes of disease. For more information about the Learning Lab and the educational program, email geneeditinginstitute@christianacare.org.

Researchers fight cybercrime with new digital forensic tools and techniques

Irfan Ahmed, Ph.D., associate professor of computer science, provides digital forensic tools — and the knowledge to use them — to the good guys fighting the never-ending cyber-security war. Ahmed is director of the Security and Forensics Engineering (SAFE) Lab within the Department of Computer Science and VCU Engineering. He leads a pair of interrelated projects funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) aimed at keeping important industrial systems safe from the bad guys — and shows the same tools crafted for investigating cyber attacks can be used to probe other crimes. The goal of cyber attacks on physical infrastructure may be to cause chaos by disrupting systems and/or to hold systems for ransom. The SAFE lab focuses on protecting industrial control systems used in the operation of nuclear plants, dams, electricity delivery systems and a wide range of other elements of critical infrastructure in the U.S. The problem isn’t new: In 2010, the Stuxnet computer worm targeted centrifuges at Iranian nuclear facilities before getting loose and infecting “innocent” computers around the world. Cyber attacks often target a portion of the software architecture known as the control logic. Control logic is vulnerable in that one of its functions is to receive instructions from the user and hand them off to be executed by a programmable logic controller. For instance, the control logic monitoring a natural gas pipeline might be programmed to open a valve if the system detects pressure getting too high. Programmers can modify the control logic — but so can attackers. One of Ahmed’s DHS-supported projects, called “Digital Forensic Tools and Techniques for Investigating Control Logic Attacks in Industrial Control Systems,” allows him to craft devices and techniques that cyber detectives can use in their investigations of attacks on sensitive critical infrastructure. Their investigation capabilities, he explains, is an under-researched area, as most of the emphasis to date has been on the prevention and detection of their cyber attacks. “The best scenario is to prevent the attacks on industrial systems,” Ahmed said. “But if an attack does happen, then what? This is where we try to fill the gap at VCU. And the knowledge that we gain in a cyber attack investigation can further help us to detect or even prevent similar attacks.” In the cat-and-mouse world of cyber security, the way cybercriminals work is in constant evolution, and Ahmed’s SAFE lab pays close attention to the latest developments by malefactors. For instance, an attacker may go for a more subtle approach than modifying the original control logic. An attack method called return-oriented programming sees the malefactor using the existing control logic code, but artfully switching the execution sequence of the code. Other attackers might insert their malware into another area of the controller, programmed to run undetected until it can replace the function of the original control logic. Attackers are always coming up with new methods, but each attack leaves evidence behind. The SAFE lab examines possible attack scenarios through simulations. Scale models of physical systems, including an elevator and a belt conveyor system, are housed at the SAFE lab to help facilitate this. The elevator is a four-floor model with inside and outside buttons feeding into a programmable logic controller. The conveyor belt is more advanced, equipped with inductive, capacitive and photoelectric sensors and able to sort objects. The tools and methods applied in cybercrime can be useful in tracking down other malefactors. That’s where Ahmed’s second DHS-funded project comes in. It’s called “Data Science-integrated Experiential Digital Forensics Training based-on Real-world Case Studies of Cybercrime Artifacts.” Ahmed is the principal investigator, working with co-PI Kostadin Damevski, Ph.D., associate professor of computer science. The goal is to keep law enforcement personnel abreast of the latest trends in the field of cybercrime investigation and to equip them with the latest tools and techniques, including those developed in the SAFE lab. “For example, investigators often have to go through thousands of images, or emails or chats, looking for something very specific,” Ahmed said. “We believe the right data science tools can help them to narrow down that search.” The FBI and other law enforcement agencies already have dedicated cybersleuthing units; the Virginia State Police have a computer evidence recovery section in Richmond. Ahmed and Damevski are arranging sessions showing investigators how techniques from data science and machine learning can make investigations more efficient by sorting through the mounds of digital evidence that increasingly is a feature of modern crime.

Ask an Expert: Is the "AI Moratorium" too far reaching?

Recent responses to chatGPT have featured eminent technologists calling for a six-month moratorium on the development of “AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.” Dr. Jeremy Kedziora, PieperPower Endowed Chair in Artificial Intelligence at Milwaukee School of Engineering, supports a middle ground approach between unregulated development and a pause. He says, "I do not agree with a moratorium, but I would call for government action to develop regulatory guidelines for AI use, particularly for endowing AIs with actions." Dr. Kedziora is available as a subject matter expert on the recent "AI moratorium" that was issued by tech leaders. According to Dr. Kedziora: There are good reasons to call for additional oversight of AI creation: Large deep or reinforcement learning systems encode complicated relationships that are difficult for users to predict and understand. Integrating them into daily use by billions of people implies some sort of complex adaptive system in which it is even more difficult for planners to anticipate, predict, and plan. This is likely fertile ground for unintended – and bad – outcomes. Rather than outright replacement, a very real possibility is that AI-enabled workers will have sufficiently high productivity that we’ll need less workers to accomplish tasks. The implication is that there won’t be enough jobs for those who want them. This means that governments will need to seriously consider proposals for UBI and work to limit economic displacement, work which will require time and political bargaining. I do not think it is controversial that we would not want a research group at MIT or CalTech, or anywhere developing an unregulated nuclear weapon. Given the difficulty in predicting its impact, AI may well be in the same category of powerful, suggesting that its creation should be subject to the democratic process. At the same time, there are some important things to keep in mind regarding chatGPT-like AI systems that suggest there are inherent limits to their impact: Though chatGPT may appear–at times–to pass the famous Turing test, this does not imply these systems ’think,’ or are ’self-aware,’ or are ’alive.’ The Turing test aims to avoid answering these questions altogether by simply asking if a machine can be distinguished from a human by another human. At the end of the day, chatGPT is nothing more than a bunch of weights! Contemporary AIs–chatGPT included–have very limited levers to pull. They simply can’t take many actions. Indeed, chatGPT’s only action is to create text in response to a prompt. It cannot do anything independently. Its effects, for now, are limited to passing through the hands of humans and to the social changes it could thereby create. The call for a moratorium emphasizes ‘control’ over AI. It is worth asking just what this control means. Take chatGPT as an example–can its makers control responses to prompts? Probably only in a limited fashion at best, with less and less ability as more people use it. There simply aren’t resources to police its responses. Can chatGPT’s makers ‘flip the off switch?’ Absolutely – restricting access to the API would effectively turn chatGPT off. In that sense, it is certainly under the same kind of control humans subjected to government are. Keep in mind that there are coordination problems – just because there is an AI moratorium in the US does not mean that other countries–particularly US adversaries– will stop development. And as others have said: “as long as AI systems have objectives set by humans, most ethics concerns related to artificial intelligence come from the ethics of the countries wielding them.” There are definitional problems with this sort of moratorium – who would be subject to it? Industry actors? Academics? The criterion those who call for the moratorium use is “AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.” What does “powerful” mean? Enforcement requires drawing boundaries around which AI development is subject to a moratorium – without those boundaries how would such a policy be enforced? It might already be too late – some already claim that they’ve recreated chatGPT. There are two major groups to think about when looking for develop regulatory solutions for AI: academia and industry. There may already be good vehicles for regulating academic research, for example oversight of grant funding. Oversight of AI development in industry is an area that requires attention and application of expertise. If you're a journalist covering Artificial Intelligence, then let us help. Dr. Kedziora is a respected expert in Data Science, Machine Learning, Statistical Modeling, Bayesian Inference, Game Theory and things AI. He's available to speak with the media - simply click on the icon now to arrange an interview today.

Aston University and asbestos consultancy to use AI to improve social housing maintenance

• Aston University and Thames Laboratories enter 30-month Knowledge Transfer Partnership • Will use machine-learning and AI to create a maintenance prioritisation system • Collaboration will reduce costs, emissions, enhance productivity and improve residents' satisfaction. Aston University is teaming up with asbestos consultancy, Thames Laboratories (TL) to improve efficiency of social housing repairs. There are over 1,600 registered social housing providers in England, managing in excess of 4.4 million homes. Each of these properties requires statutory inspections to check gas, asbestos and water hygiene, in addition to general upkeep. However, there is not currently a scheduling system available that offers integration between key maintenance and safety contractors, resulting in additional site visits and increased travel costs and re-work. Aston University computer scientists will use machine-learning and AI to create a maintenance prioritisation system that will centralise job requests and automatically allocate them to the relevant contractors. The collaboration is through a Knowledge Transfer Partnership (KTP) - a collaboration between a business, an academic partner and a highly-qualified researcher, known as a KTP associate. This partnership builds on the outcomes of TL’s first collaboration with Aston University, by expanding the system developed for the company’s in-house use - which directs its field staff to jobs. The project team will improve the system developed during the current KTP to enable it to interact with client and contractor systems, by combining an input data processing unit, enhanced optimisation algorithms, customer enhancements and third-party add-ons into a single dynamic system. The Aston University team will be led by Aniko Ekart, professor of artificial intelligence. She said: “It is a privilege to be involved in the creation of this system, which will select the best contractor for each job based on their skill set, availability and location and be reactive to changing priorities of jobs." TL, based in Fenstanton, just outside Cambridge, provides asbestos consultancy, project management and training to businesses, local authorities, social housing and education facilities, using a fleet of mobile engineers across the UK. John Richards, managing director at Thames Laboratories, said: “This partnership will allow us to adopt the latest research and expertise from a world-leading academic institute to develop an original solution to improving the efficiency of social housing repairs, maintenance and improvements to better meet the needs of social housing residents.” Professor Ekart will be joined by Dr Alina Patelli as academic supervisor. Dr Patelli brings experience of software development in the commercial sector as well as expertise in applying optimisation techniques with focus on urban systems. She said: “This is a great opportunity to enhance state-of-the-art optimisation and machine learning in order to fit the needs of the commercial sector and deliver meaningful impact to Thames Laboratories.”

How Colorism Impacts Professional Achievement

Melissa J. Williams is associate professor of organization and management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. She investigates what happens when social identities collide with workplace hierarchies, and the consequences of putting people in positions of power and leadership. Here she looks at something less documented: the extent to which our appearance is stereotypically Black or white. And what that means for our prospects. Rosa Parks made history on December 1, 1955, when she refused to relinquish her bus seat to a white passenger. Her simple gesture of defiance ignited a city-wide bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama, and has gone down in the annals as a pivotal moment for the social justice movement in the United States. However, Parks was not the only African American to make a stand against racial segregation. Nor was she the first. In March of the same year in the same city, 15-year-old Claudette Colvin also refused to give up her seat to a white woman on a Montgomery bus. So why isn’t she a household name? In part, Colvin’s age was a factor. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and other Black civil rights groups got behind Parks, reasoning that an older woman would be better equipped to withstand the controversy. But as Colvin herself stated, there were other factors at play. There was something about Parks’ appearance that gave her more leverage, reasons Colvin explained in Philip Hoose’s award-winning book on the civil rights movement. She had the “right hair and the right look.” Not only that, but her appearance “was the kind that people associate with the middle class. She fit that profile.” Success isn’t black or white. It’s shades of…white. Colorism has long been documented in the U.S. and elsewhere. Discrimination against human beings on the basis of their facial features, hair, and skin color transcends race—it is prevalent even within groups that share the same ethnic identity, where lighter skin tones are perceived to be more valuable than dark. Research over the years has shed light on the nefarious effects of colorism or shadeism in terms of equity and access to opportunity. But a new landmark study by Associate Professor of Organization & Management Melissa Williams, and Goizueta colleagues, PhD student Tosen Nwadei and Roberto C. Goizueta Chair of Organization & Management Anand Swaminathan, looks at just how Black or white someone appears—and how this shapes the way others see their potential; as well as the kinds of professional outcomes they can expect. What Williams and her co-authors, who also include James B. Wade from George Washington University and C. Keith Harrison and Scott Bukstein of University of Central Florida, find in their studies, is that Black professionals are less likely to be promoted to leadership roles. What’s more, for Black professionals whose physical appearance is more Black-stereotypical, their chances drop from 12 percent to a mere seven percent. For white professionals, on the other hand, having a more white-stereotypical appearance is an advantage for leadership – looking more stereotypical as a white person increased their chances of holding a leadership role from 32 percent to 43 percent. Williams and colleagues ran both an archival study and a lab experiment with volunteers to discover the extent to which degrees of ethnicity in appearance influence perceptions of a person’s potential for leadership and actually predict their likelihood of success in an industry. While the science unequivocally shows that white people enjoy advantages over Black people in opportunity and outcome across the board, Williams et al. were also interested in exploring what she calls the “continuum of race:” the more nuanced racial characteristics and differences that shape how the world sees us. There’s an assumption that everyone within the same ethnic group—Black or white—will experience the same degree of bias and prejudice, or acceptance and success. And we wanted to push back on that idea to really explore how degrees of whiteness or Blackness play out in people’s minds and shape how they read you physically. -Associate Professor of Organization & Management Melissa Williams Previous research shows the link between persisting in STEM-based majors in college and how much students are perceived to look “like their race,” she says. Those who are perceived to look less typically Black tend to make more friends outside their ethnic group—a boundary-crossing behavior that can help drive careers. To test these ideas, Williams and co-authors ran two studies. First, they accessed publicly available data including photographs, professional background, and positions from one large industry within the U.S.: American college football. College football is really rich in data. You can access job titles, photos, leadership, and non-leadership roles; and you can separate individuals out into head coaches and position coaches who have overseeing roles but who are not leaders per se. Separately, Williams et al. recruited a group of volunteers to look at the images of the football coaches: a mix of Black and white head and position coaches. These volunteers were asked to rate how typical they perceived each individual’s appearance to be of European or white Americans, or of Black Americans, ascribing each person a score out of five based on features such as their skin color, hair, eyes, nose, cheeks, and lips. These scores were then regressed—or cross-referenced—with the position held by the individuals in the photos to determine the relationship between their racial stereotypicality and their leadership role. Crunching the numbers, Williams found a direct correlation between the degree of perceived whiteness or Blackness of the coaches and how likely they actually were to be successful leaders. “We do find a kind of consensus in people’s view of what it means to be Black or white straight off,” says Williams. “So we do all seem to agree on the physical attributes of race. But it gets really interesting when you regress the scores that these photos get and compare them with the actual jobs these guys hold.” What we see is that, controlling for their age, attractiveness, and professional experience, the white guys who look less stereotypically white are 32 percent likely to occupy leadership roles. This rises to 43 percent with the men who look more like a stereotypical white guy. For Black professionals, the inverse is true, she notes. The more typically Black an individual looks, the less probability there is that he occupies a leadership job. Specifically, that figure drops from 12 to seven percent. So benchmark leadership probability is not only already lower for Black individuals, but drops even further when people are deemed to look “more typically Black,” says Williams. A follow-up experiment invited volunteer football fans to compare how they saw the potential future success of two same-race college football players—one more stereotypical in appearance than the other. The results confirm what Williams et al. suspect: 70 percent of the time, participants chose the more-typical white individual over the less-typical white individual as having greater leadership potential. In other words, the more white a white person looks, the more they are seen as leadership material. These findings should translate into an imperative, says Williams; and that is to think more broadly about race and how it impacts life outcomes. Because race is not a uniform experience, she says. “Organizations might want to look beyond just ticking the box when it comes to diversity and inclusion, and give deeper thought to who they want to recruit, support and push forward in representation. For white people, paying attention to whiteness—the types of white people who enjoy advantages in leadership—can be useful in reframing certain questions. A good place to start might be for leaders to ask: do I want to support people who look like me? Because the face you choose can ultimately help disrupt, or reinforce, the stereotype.” Interested in learning more or connecting with Melissa J. Williams, associate professor of organization and management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School?  She's available to speak about this subject - Simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.

#Expert Insight: Price Image Formation: When is HILO low?

When consumers choose where to shop, they often consider a store’s price image —does the store have a reputation for having lower or higher prices than its competitors? A store’s reputation for lower prices doesn’t happen by chance. Choosing a pricing strategy is one of the biggest pricing decisions a retailer makes. In “When is HILO Low? Price Image Formation Based on Frequency versus Depth Pricing Strategies,” a recently published paper in the Journal of Consumer Research, co-authors Ryan Hamilton, associate professor of marketing, Ramnath Chellappa, associate dean and Goizueta term professor of information systems and operations management, and Daniel Sheehan, associate professor of marketing and supply chain at the University of Kentucky’s Gatton College of Business and Economics, explore a gap in existing pricing strategy research. “Our research doesn’t threaten the validity of the previous research,” said Hamilton, “but what it does do is point to the limited generalizability of the previous research.” This is because previous pricing strategy research used the same research paradigm: It emphasized consumers’ perspectives as they compared prices simultaneously across multiple stores. Hamilton, Chellappa, and Sheehan wondered what would happen if they studied consumers as they compared prices of products within a store, instead of across stores. When they did so, the authors found that “many of the prominent findings of previous research are reversed,” they wrote. “We propose that when stores’ prices are evaluated one at a time, or in isolation, consumers will rely on the most salient contextual clues available—within-category price information—when forming a price image.” For example, rather than research the price of peanut butter across multiple grocery stores, shoppers often evaluate the price of peanut butter by comparing the prices of the brands on the shelf in front of them. To illustrate their point, the authors explore two basic pricing strategies: a frequency pricing strategy and a depth pricing strategy. Every Day Low Pricing (EDLP) is a frequency strategy where stores offer small price advantages over their competitors on many items. Walmart employs an EDLP strategy. A common depth strategy is a high-low (HILO) pricing strategy. HILO offers infrequent, but deep, price advantages over competitors. Macy’s utilizes this strategy. “The conventional wisdom is that EDLP equals low price,” explained Hamilton. But he and his co-authors argue that in a non-theoretical environment, the effectiveness of EDLP strategies is less clear. The trio hypothesized that the context in which consumers encounter prices has important implications. Specifically, that the frequency advantage of EDLP identified in earlier research was limited to those scenarios where customers were able to simultaneously compare prices across multiple stores. In contrast, they argue that a depth advantage, one resulting from HILO pricing, will be more likely when consumers evaluate store prices separately. “Without simultaneous comparisons across stores, consumers shift from using across-store prices as reference points to using within-category reference prices. As a result of this shift, deep price advantages are easier to evaluate than frequent price advantages and therefore more influential on customers’ formation of price image,” they write. “Because our theoretical account is based on within-category external reference prices, we predict that a depth store is likely to be evaluated as having a lower price image than a frequency store even when consumers are exposed to the prices of just one store,” they write. The authors tested their hypothesis using six separate experiments. All but one of the experiments studied national brands commonly found in grocery stores. (The other experiment used televisions.) In the experiments where participants saw store prices simultaneously, the experiment replicated the frequency advantage noted in previous research. But when participants did not have simultaneous price information across stores, the previous findings didn’t hold “What we found is that if you distance those prices comparisons even a little bit -showing a price on one webpage and then seeing a price on another webpage - that’s enough to completely reverse the findings,” explained Hamilton. In an isolated setting, “a couple of really low prices” will better communicate a store’s low-price image, said Hamilton. “That’s the big story.” While excited about the findings of their research, Hamilton is quick to point out the limits of their hypothesis, such as when pricing information isn’t readily available or when the consumer isn’t familiar with the brands of the product they wish to buy. “People want a simple answer that works everywhere, but it’s more nuanced than that,” said Hamilton. “This [hypothesis] is going to work better under certain set of circumstances than others because people process price information differently.” The insights aren’t only useful for retailers. While using a store’s price image to shop can be efficient from a consumer standpoint, assuming that the prices are low solely because the store has a reputation for low prices isn’t always the case. A retailer’s price image has vulnerabilities. Not everything at Costco is cheaper than it is at Whole Foods. Southwest Airlines may not always be cheaper than Delta Air Lines. “If you’re shopping for things you really care about,” advised Hamilton, “it might be worth doing more across-store price comparisons.” Chellappa is excited about how the paper addresses gaps in traditional economic models of pricing. “While much research in economics and information systems focuses on the availability of information for price comparison, the cognitive aspect of ‘how’ consumers compare and process such information is only explicated by studies such as ours. Looking at pricing through a behavioral lens, capturing consumers’ real shopping behavior reveals great insights that will be useful for firms,” he said. Interested in learning more about consumer behavior and Price Image Formation Based on Frequency versus Depth Pricing Strategies? Then let us help with your coverage and questions. Ryan Hamilton and Ramnath Chellappa are both available to speak regarding this important topic - simply click on either expert's icon now to arrange an interview today.

Goizueta Faculty Member Uncovers Impact of Remote Learning on Educational Inequality

In 2020, the world went into lockdown. Learning in school became learning from the couch. Rather than listening to teachers in-person behind a desk, high school students had to find a computer to stream their lectures and lessons. What happens to educational inequality in a digital-first, remote-learning environment? Whereas students are traditionally bound by their brick-and-mortar schools and the limitations of funding in those areas, what happens when the walls are removed and students have access to the teachers, knowledge, and peers from other areas? Ruomeng Cui and co-researchers, Zhanzhi Zheng from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Shenyang Jiang from Tongji University, decided to find out. In their 2022 paper, currently under review, Cui and her colleagues looked at the performance of high school students in developing and developed regions of China. We thought that remote learning might reduce the inequality gap in education because when students are learning off-line, they’re restricted by their local resources. “It’s quite obvious that developing regions don’t have good resources, experienced teachers, or competitive peers—they often have inferior educational resources in comparison to developed regions,” explains Cui, associate professor of information systems and operations management. “We thought the accessibility of remote learning could help reduce this knowledge gap and help students in developing regions improve their learning outcomes.” Analyzing Education in Developed and Developing Areas The idea for the paper, “Remote Learning and Educational Inequality,” published earlier this year, stemmed from another of Cui’s papers, which looked at the academic productivity of women as a result of the COVID-19 lockdowns. “We wanted to study whether the switch to remote learning impacts educational inequality. Does it make it better or worse?” says Cui. “We are the first ones to offer empirical evidence on such a granular level about a large-scale data set.” The group analyzed the Chinese college entrance exam from 2018 through 2020, which students take during the last few weeks of high school; the test score is a requirement for undergraduate admission in China. It’s common for high schools to announce the number of students who scored 600 or higher (out of 750 total points). Using 1,458 high school exam results from 20 provinces, the group found that in 2020, when remote learning became the norm, “the number of students scoring above 600 points in developing regions increased by 22.22 percent,” in comparison to developed regions. Remote learning significantly improved learning outcomes of students in developing regions. We should think about encouraging the adoption of remote learning in education However, Cui and her co-researchers wanted to go a step further. Because the entrance exams are summaries of student data, they surveyed 1,198 students to drill down and ensure that these results came from remote learning rather than other factors. Respondents were asked to rate aspects of their remote-learning experience, such as access to digital devices, their proficiency in using software, how reliable their internet was, how they interacted with peers and teachers, and their access to online educational resources. The researchers found that students in developing regions were able to better connect with peers and teachers, and the students believed that “their learning efficiency was greater” because of the remote learning. Education inequality is not only a problem in China. It’s everywhere. It’s across the world. Having access to better educational resources online can be applied anywhere. However, the one caveat to their findings: Remote learning is beneficial, but students need devices and the infrastructure to support online learning, which is often lacking in developing regions or underserved areas. “We need to support, build, and develop the digital technology capability that enables the effectiveness of remote learning,” says Cui. Are you a reporter looking to know more about the impact COVID had on education and how inequality plays a role in how we educate students during a pandemic? Then let us help with your coverage and questions. Ruomeng Cui is an Associate Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management at Emory University's  Goizueta School of Business.   Ruomeng is available to speak with media regarding this topic - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.