Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
On March 10, 1876, Alexander Graham Bell spoke the first words ever transmitted over telephone: “Mr. Watson, come here; I want you.” This simple request to Bell’s assistant, Thomas Watson, marked a significant milestone in direct person-to-person communication. Now, 150 years later, this message has paved the way for advanced cellular technology in the form of satellites, wireless networks and the personal devices we carry everywhere. For Mojtaba Vaezi, PhD, associate professor of electrical and computer engineering at Villanova University and director of the Wireless Networking Laboratory, Bell’s few words spoken over telephone marked the beginning of an ongoing technological revolution. “One hundred fifty years ago when telephone communication first started, there was essentially a wired line and a transmitting voice,” said Dr. Vaezi. “That simple, basic transmission has transformed the field of communication technology in unimaginable ways.” According to Dr. Vaezi, five shifts have defined the past century and a half of communication technology: wired devices to wireless, analog to digital, voice to data, fixed landlines to mobile phones and human-to-human communication giving way to an increasing focus on machines and artificial intelligence. Early wireless networks were built around one device per person. Today's networks must support multiple devices per person, plus the technology behind innovations such as smart homes, driverless cars and even remote surgery. “Applications are much more diverse now, so communication has to follow,” said Dr. Vaezi. “A big portion of communication now, in terms of number of connections to the network, is from machine to machine—not human to human or even human to machine." The growing number of connections can cause a host of issues for users. When multiple users share the same wireless spectrum simultaneously, their signals interfere with one another—a problem that is becoming more acute as the number of connected devices increases exponentially. Dr. Vaezi’s research at Villanova focuses on developing techniques that allow multiple users to transmit messages on the same frequency at the same time and still be understood. Another vibrant research area of Dr. Vaezi’s involves Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC). This field of study focuses on integrating wireless communications and radar so they can function within the same spectrum. “Historically, radar and wireless communication work in different bandwidths or spectrums and use separate devices. Although they are related, they happen in different fields,” said Dr. Vaezi. “Almost every communication scheme that has been developed has focused on this: How can we better utilize the spectrum?” ISAC is increasingly important as new innovations like driverless cars become fixtures in everyday life. These vehicles rely on radar to continuously scan for hazards, and when a hazard is detected, a signal must be sent to trigger safety mechanisms. Currently, the radar and communications systems operate on separate bandwidths using separate hardware. Dr. Vaezi's research explores how both functions could be housed in a single device running on one shared spectrum. Areas of study like Dr. Vaezi’s that focus on machine to machine communication are becoming increasingly relevant as communication technology evolves and moves away from simple person to person messaging. As for the next big milestone in communications, Dr. Vaezi is looking ahead to the implementation of 6G by 2030, though he tempers expectations. For most users, the change will feel modest, amounting to slightly faster device speeds. The most massive shift with 6G will be the amount of added coverage in areas that previously did not have network accessibility. “Say you order a package and it’s coming from somewhere abroad,” explained Dr. Vaezi. “6G will add network coverage over oceans, so you’ll be able to track your package in real time using that satellite technology.” The sixth generation of cellular technology will continue to connect our world and optimize current communications to accommodate more users and devices that need network access each day. It is far different from Alexander Graham Bell’s historic phone call 150 years ago. That brief exchange over a single wired line laid the groundwork for a communications ecosystem that now supports billions of devices, complex data networks and emerging technologies yet to be seen. It also serves as a reminder that despite how far communication technology has come, and how complex it has gotten, it all shares a common, simple goal: to transmit information from one point to another.
Rethinking AI in the classroom: A literacy-first approach to generative technology
As schools nationwide navigate the rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence, educators are searching for guidance that goes beyond fear, hype or quick fixes. Rachel Karchmer-Klein, associate professor of literacy education at the University of Delaware, is helping lead that conversation. Her latest book, Putting AI to Work in Disciplinary Literacy: Shifting Mindsets and Guiding Classroom Instruction, offers research-based strategies for integrating AI into secondary classrooms without sacrificing critical thinking or deep learning. Here is how she is approaching the complex topic. Q: Your new book focuses on AI in disciplinary literacy. What is the central message? Karchmer-Klein: Rather than positioning AI as a shortcut or replacement for student thinking, the book emphasizes a literacy-first approach that helps students critically evaluate, interrogate, and apply AI-generated information. This is important because schools and universities are grappling with rapid AI adoption, often without clear guidance grounded in learning theory, literacy research, or classroom practice. Q: What inspired this research? Karchmer-Klein: The book grew directly out of my work with preservice teachers, practicing educators, and school leaders who were asking practical but complex questions about AI: How do we use it responsibly? How do we prevent over-reliance? How do we teach students to question what AI produces? I also saw a gap between public conversations about AI which often focused on fear or efficiency and what teachers actually need: research-informed strategies that support deep learning. My long-standing research in digital literacies provided a natural foundation for addressing these questions. Q: What are some of the key findings from your work? Karchmer-Klein: AI is most effective when it is embedded within strong instructional design and disciplinary literacy practices, not treated as a stand-alone tool. The research and classroom examples illustrate that AI can support student learning when it is used to prompt reasoning, reveal misconceptions, provide feedback for revision, and encourage multiple perspectives. Another important development is the emphasis on teaching students to evaluate AI outputs critically by recognizing bias, inaccuracies, and limitations, rather than assuming correctness. Q: How could this work impact schools, teacher education programs and the broader public? Karchmer-Klein: For educators, this work provides concrete, evidence-based literacy strategies coupled with AI in ways that strengthen, not dilute, student thinking. For teacher education programs and school districts, it offers a research-based framework for professional development and policy conversations around AI use. More broadly, the work speaks to a public concern about how emerging technologies are shaping learning, helping to reframe AI as something that requires human judgment, ethical consideration, and strong literacy skills to use well. ABOUT RACHEL KARCHMER-KLEIN Rachel Karchmer-Klein is an associate professor in the School of Education at the University of Delaware where she teaches courses in literacy and educational technology at the undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral levels. She is a former elementary classroom teacher and reading specialist. Her research investigates relationships among literacy skills, digital tools, and teacher preparation, with particular emphasis on technology-infused instructional design. To speak with Karchmer-Klein further about AI in literacy education, critical evaluation of AI-generated content and teacher preparation in the era of generative AI, reach out to MediaRelations@udel.edu.
Covering the Economy? FAU has the ideal expert to help with your questions and stories
The economy isn’t just a headline, it’s the story behind nearly every headline. From grocery bills and mortgage rates to job growth, small business confidence, and federal policy decisions, economic forces shape daily life for Americans in ways that are immediate and deeply personal. For journalists, that makes the economy a constant, high-stakes beat. Audiences want clear answers: Why are prices rising? Are we headed for a slowdown? What does the Fed’s next move mean for my community? The challenge is cutting through jargon and partisan spin to deliver insight that’s accurate, grounded, and understandable. That’s where William Luther, Ph.D., stands out. A respected economist and Associate Professor at Florida Atlantic University, Luther brings serious academic credibility, but explains economic trends in plain language that resonates beyond the classroom. His expertise in monetary policy, inflation, unemployment, cryptocurrency, and economic growth makes him a valuable resource for breaking news, enterprise stories, and long-form analysis alike. Whether reporters are covering Florida’s housing market, national interest rate decisions, or the future of digital currency, Luther offers thoughtful, balanced analysis that helps audiences understand not just what’s happening, but why it matters. William Luther, Ph.D., is an expert in monetary economics and macroeconomics. He is an associate professor of economics at Florida Atlantic University, director of the American Institute for Economic Research’s Sound Money Project, and an adjunct scholar with the Cato Institute’s Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives. The Social Science Research Network currently ranks him in the top five percent of business authors. View his profile Recent media coverage: ABC News Others downplayed the likelihood of a meaningful loss of Fed independence, since news of the DOJ investigation of Powell drew a rare degree of Republican opposition. Powell holds only a single vote on the 12-member board responsible for setting interest rates, they said. “Anytime we’re changing institutions, we should have some concern,” William Luther, a professor of economics at Florida Atlantic University, told ABC News. “At the same time, we should recognize the institutional safeguards we have are pretty strong.” Newsweek William Luther, associate professor of economics at Florida Atlantic University, said that the immediate net financial loss to those in Florida, and all Americans, appears to be "very, very large." Luther added Florida should expect a short-term "sharp contraction" in real estate and tourism, both vital sectors for the state's economy. NPR At the moment, the economy is performing very well. It wasn't performing very well not too long ago, both because of the pandemic, which reduced our ability to produce goods and services quite significantly, and then, as a result of some of the policy responses to that pandemic, we had very high inflation. NBC Will Luther, an economics associate professor at Florida Atlantic University, acknowledged the concerns among students. "Absolutely, there are students very much concerned with whether or not they will be able to get a job when they finish here. The good news is that they will. The bad news is it's a little harder right now than it was, say, two years ago," Luther said. Fox Nation FAU's William Luther joins Fox Nation's Deep Dive, hosted by the Wall Street Journal's Mary Anastasia O'Grady, to discuss the economic impact of cryptocurrencies. Video courtesy of Fox Nation's Deep Dive.
The Secret to Happiness? Feeling Loved.
After more than 50 years studying close relationships, University of Rochester psychologist Harry Reis has reached a deceptively simple conclusion: Happy people feel loved. That conclusion became the jumping-off point for a new book Reis co-wrote, “How to Feel Loved: The Five Mindsets That Get You More of What Matters Most” (Harper 2026), which blends decades of research on happiness and human connection. In it, Reis and his co-author, Sonja Lyubomirsky, a psychologist at the University of California, Riverside, outline five research-backed mindsets that strengthen connection: sharing authentically, listening to people, practicing radical curiosity, approaching others with an open heart, and recognizing human complexity. The book was recently featured in The New York Times, which noted that the authors contend giving and receiving love function together like a seesaw: You lift a person up with the weight of your curiosity and attentiveness — and they do the same in turn. “The other side is very important also,” Reis told The Times. “To be sharing what’s important to you, to be sharing what you’re concerned about, so it can really become a two-way street.” Reis, who leads groundbreaking research on close relationships, is available to discuss: • The science of feeling loved vs. being loved • How digital distraction undermines connection • AI companionship and its psychological limits • Practical ways to build stronger, more resilient relationships • The link between love, happiness, and health Journalists writing about love and relationships can contact Reis by clicking on his profile.
What Time Should You Actually Turn Off Your Phone at Night?
Everyone’s heard you’re “not supposed to be on your phone before bed” but what does that actually mean in 2026? Most major sleep organizations now recommend putting devices away at least 30–60 minutes before bedtime to protect melatonin and help the brain wind down. The National Sleep Foundation and the American Academy of Sleep Medicine both advise turning off screens about an hour before bed; other experts say a 30–60 minute window is the minimum. (Advisory) Research on blue light shows that evening screen exposure suppresses melatonin and delays sleep, especially when you’re scrolling something stimulating. (Sutter Health) Psychotherapist Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW, who specializes in ADHD and digital dependency, puts it bluntly: “To ensure quality sleep and peak performance—whether in sports, work, or school—avoid using your phone after 11 p.m.” For teens and adults with ADHD or anxiety, she says, late-night doomscrolling is especially brutal: screens keep dopamine and stress high at exactly the time the nervous system should be powering down. Harshi says: "The quality of sleep determines your level of executive functioning the next day" She also makes an important distinction: if you are on a device in the evening, active use (choosing a show, talking to friends, looking up something specific) is less harmful than passive use: “Don’t do passive tech use — that doom scrolling, content just being thrown at you,” Sritharan says. “Be more active about your tech use.” That kind of passive feed is more likely to serve up emotionally intense content kids didn’t ask for and aren’t ready to process. You Don’t Need a Perfect Curfew to See Results The good news: the science suggests you don’t have to quit completely at night to feel a difference. A JAMA Network Open study on young adults found that reducing social media use for just one week — not going cold turkey — led to about a 24.8% drop in depression, 16.1% drop in anxiety and 14.5% improvement in insomnia symptoms. Offline.now founder Eli Singer argues that the real challenge is confidence, not willpower. Their data show 8 in 10 people want a healthier relationship with tech, but more than half feel too overwhelmed to know where to start. The platform’s behavior data also show that late afternoons and evenings are when phones dominate use and when people are actually most motivated to make changes. We have less in the tank at night, don't trust willpower to transition off. Have a system/routine of pre-decided of low-effort (potentially fun) activities to help the transition off phones. “We tell people: don’t start with a perfect 8 p.m. curfew,” Singer says. “Start with one realistic phone-off window — even 30 minutes before bed — and prove to yourself you can protect that. That first win matters more than an ideal schedule you’ll never keep.” A Simple, Science-Aligned Answer For most people, Offline.now’s experts land on a practical, high-compliance answer to the question “What time should I turn off my phone?” Aim to put your phone away 30–60 minutes before your target bedtime Make everything after that screen-free by default (books, stretching, music, talking, journaling) If you must be on a device late, keep it brief, low-drama and intentional — no infinite feeds, no emotionally loaded content It’s a small change, but in the context of a day where we’re already on screens for roughly 10 of our 16 waking hours, that last hour matters. Featured Experts Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW – Psychotherapist specializing in ADHD, anxiety, insomnia and digital dependency. She explains how late-night and early-morning phone use hijack dopamine, disrupt sleep and make it harder for kids and adults to function the next day. Eli Singer – Founder of Offline.now and author of Offline.now: A Practical Guide to Healthy Digital Balance. He speaks to the platform’s behavioral data on when people are most ready to change, and how 20-minute micro-experiments (like one phone-off window at night) build real confidence over time. Expert interviews can be arranged through the Offline.now media team.
When you are first introduced to expertise marketing it can be hard to imagine that there are experts hiding within your organization. We tend to think of experts as a small group at the top but in reality that is just the tip of the iceberg. Across teams and departments there are people with the knowledge, skills and experience to contribute to meaningful conversations with your audiences. These individuals may not always carry the title of expert but their perspectives can help explain complex issues, contribute to research and shape the content your organization produces. When their expertise is recognized and supported it can help build trust with key audiences including media, industry partners and prospective clients. The challenge many organizations face is knowing how to assess expertise in the first place. To identify these hidden experts and understand the role they can play in an expertise marketing program it helps to start with a simple question. What actually makes someone an expert? The 7 Attributes of Expertise By definition an expert is someone with comprehensive or authoritative knowledge in a particular area of study. While formal education and certifications can be important starting points many fields do not have a clear set of criteria that determines expertise. In practice expertise develops through a combination of training, research, professional experience and real-world application. It is also shaped by the level of trust and recognition someone has earned within their profession or community. When evaluating expertise across your organization it is important to consider the different roles people can play. Many individuals have invested years developing deep knowledge in their fields but not everyone is interested in speaking at conferences or appearing in the media. That does not reduce the value of their expertise. Many contribute through research, insights and content development that support broader visibility for the organization. Here are several attributes that help define expertise and the roles people can play within an expertise marketing strategy. Authority: Has a reputation with an audience as a trusted source of insight and perspective. Advocate: Demonstrates a commitment to advancing a professional community or area of practice. Educator: Teaches and inspires others through lectures, presentations or classroom instruction. Author: Develops articles, commentary or thought leadership that expands their reach and influence. Researcher: Generates new insights through research, analysis or field work. Practitioner: Applies specialized knowledge in a professional setting by delivering services or solutions. Graduate: Has formal education or professional training that demonstrates proficiency in a subject area. Understanding these attributes helps organizations see that expertise exists across many roles. Once those individuals are identified the next step is determining how their expertise can contribute to broader visibility and engagement. The 4 Levels of Expertise Understanding how to promote expertise is an emerging discipline for many organizations. Unlike traditional career paths expertise does not always follow a predictable hierarchy. When we consider which experts are most visible to audiences it becomes clear that visibility is not always tied to seniority or authority within an organization. Professionals at many stages of their careers are now sharing insights through social networks, industry publications and personal platforms. This means that a senior researcher with decades of experience and a younger professional actively sharing insights online could have a similar level of visibility. Because visibility is influenced by personal motivation and interest in public engagement many organizations recognize the need to better identify and support experts across their teams. Doing so helps ensure that valuable knowledge is not overlooked and that more voices can contribute to meaningful conversations. The framework below can help organizations take inventory of their expertise and develop a path for individuals who are interested in contributing content and building visibility with key audiences. Now that we’ve provided a broader picture of what expertise looks like, it’s time for you to ask, “How does my organization stack up?” Bench Strength: Taking Stock of Expertise Across Your Organization Expertise is in high demand. Audiences are looking for credible voices who can provide context and insight on complex issues. For organizations, this means it is critical to understand how their collective expertise can be channeled into meaningful conversations with their audiences. As you review the attributes and levels of expertise outlined above you may begin to recognize individuals within your organization who have valuable knowledge but may not have been considered visible experts before. Identifying these individuals is an important first step but recognition alone is not enough. Mobilizing expertise marketing requires support and investment from leadership across the organization. Senior leaders will want to understand the value of elevating internal expertise and how it contributes to reputation, visibility and opportunity. The organizations that succeed are those that recognize expertise as a strategic asset and take deliberate steps to surface it, support it and share it with the audiences who are actively searching for it. The Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing For a comprehensive look at how expertise marketing benefits the entire organization and drives measurable return on investment, follow the link below to download an industry-focussed copy of ExpertFile’s Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing: The Next Wave in Digital Strategy
Op-Ed: Crypto innovation needs stability, not shortcuts
After months of bipartisan negotiations, Congress continues to debate crypto market structure legislation, though questions remain whether common sense investor protections will be included in a new federal framework for digital assets. These proposals address fundamental questions aimed at providing needed clarity for digital asset markets, including around agency jurisdiction, and trust and confidence for mainstream adoption of modern markets. At times, the negotiations fractured over stablecoin yields, while provisions addressing decentralized finance and developer liability and the importance of investor safeguards have proven similarly divisive. The GENIUS Act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest, recognizing such payments transform digital tokens into bank deposits requiring regulatory oversight. Platforms opposing restrictions on stablecoin yields prioritize business models generating revenue by offering deposit-like products without deposit-like regulation – an unfair regulatory arbitrage that disadvantages prudentially supervised banks, drains funding from local lending and introduces systemic risk without corresponding accountability. While these complex issues require careful calibration, there is no substitute for keeping investor-first reforms at the center of market structure legislation and prioritizing clear rules and robust investor safeguards that ensure digital assets benefit everyday investors and that America strengthens its economic competitiveness and leads the next era of financial innovation. Such impasses reflect a pattern where narrow interests prevail over broader economic considerations. Platforms opposing restrictions on stablecoin yields prioritize business models generating revenue by offering deposit-like products without deposit-like regulation. Banking institutions recognize that unregulated competition operating under lower-cost structures will drain funding from local lending. Both positions are economically rational for the parties involved. Neither serves the public interest in financial stability. Likewise, opponents argue that regulation stifles innovation, especially in decentralized finance. But this conflates innovation with regulatory arbitrage. Genuine technological progress creates value by improving efficiency or reducing costs. Regulatory arbitrage extracts value by exploiting gaps between economically equivalent activities subject to different rules. The alternative claim – that existing securities laws suffice – ignores that those frameworks were designed for different market structures. Securities laws assume centralized issuers. Commodity regulations assume physical delivery. Digital assets often fit neither category cleanly, creating uncertainty that inhibits legitimate activity while failing to prevent abuse. The choice is not between perfect legislation and the status quo but between establishing clear rules now or waiting for the next crisis. Financial regulation written in crisis tends toward overcorrection that stifles markets for years. Regulation developed deliberately better balances stability with innovation. Both House and Senate committee versions share core elements providing needed clarity on agency jurisdiction, registration requirements and disclosure standards. International considerations reinforce urgency. The European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation provides comprehensive frameworks for issuers and service providers. Continued U.S. regulatory ambiguity cedes leadership to jurisdictions that may not share American economic interests. More immediately, delay allows risks to accumulate as digital assets become interconnected with traditional finance through retirement plans and institutional portfolios. Recent market failures demonstrate why regulatory clarity and investor safeguards matter. The 2022 collapse of crypto exchange FTX revealed an $8 billion dollar deficit in customer accounts, spreading losses to pension funds and individual retirement accounts. Investigators identified conflicts of interest and leverage that standard regulation would have prevented. When Silicon Valley Bank failed, one major stablecoin had 8% of reserves tied to that institution. The crisis resolved only because uninsured depositors received public support. These episodes reveal a pattern where institutions operating outside prudential supervision accumulate risks requiring public intervention. Markets function best when rules are clear, consistently enforced and apply equally to all participants. This principle applies whether the market involves energy commodities, agricultural credit or digital assets. Louisiana's economy depends on community banks that understand local conditions and maintain lending relationships through economic cycles. When regulatory gaps allow deposit flight to lightly supervised alternatives, these institutions lose capacity to serve small businesses and agricultural operations. Congress has made meaningful progress on consensus-driven legislation. Completing that work would provide clarity allowing legitimate innovation while preventing regulatory arbitrage that creates systemic risk. The alternative is waiting for the next crisis to demonstrate why such frameworks were necessary.
The Double-Edged Scroll: Why Passive Screen Time Drains You More Than Active Use
Most conversations about “screen time” focus on hours. But newer research and what clinicians see in practice suggest how you use your phone may matter as much as how much you use it. A 2024 meta-analysis of 141 studies on active vs passive social media use found that, overall, effects are small, but there is a pattern: passive use (just scrolling and watching) is more consistently associated with worse emotional outcomes, while some forms of active use (commenting, messaging, posting) show small links to greater wellbeing and online social support. (OUP Academic) Other work from Frontiers in Psychology suggests that the emotional impact of passive use depends heavily on how you feel about the content: when it triggers envy, comparison or negativity, mental ill-being goes up; when it’s genuinely positive, the effect can be neutral or even slightly protective for some users. (Frontiers) Reviews also point to upward social comparison, FOMO and rumination as key pathways linking passive browsing to lower wellbeing. (ScienceDirect) Psychotherapist Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW works with teens and adults who feel “wiped out” by their feeds and draws a sharp line between passive and active tech use: “Don’t do passive tech use — that doom scrolling, or content just being thrown at you,” she says. “I want people to engage in active tech use. Go and search something up, choose the long-form video you actually want, talk to your friends. Don’t let the app decide everything you see — especially for kids, who are getting content they’re not ready for and didn’t sign up for.” She notes that many of her clients describe feeling “numb, anxious or wired” after long passive sessions, a sign that their nervous system is being pulled around by unpredictable, emotionally loaded content rather than chosen experiences. She also discussed the short term recall related to scrolling: "Some of my clients can't even remember what content they consumed right after scrolling. However, we know that what we pay attention to and what we show our brains has an impact on our thoughts, mindset, feelings and overall internal world." Offline.now founder Eli Singer frames this as a design problem, not a moral failing. The platform’s research shows people already spend about 10 of their 16 waking hours on screens; the realistic goal is to upgrade some of that time, not pretend we can all go offline. His advice: instead of vowing to “get off your phone,” start by swapping just 20 minutes a day from passive to active use; for example, messaging a friend to meet up, learning something specific, or planning an offline activity. “When people tell us they feel overwhelmed by their screen habits, it’s not laziness, it’s a crisis of confidence,” Singer says. “We don’t need perfect digital detoxes. We need small, winnable shifts, like taking one block of passive scrolling and turning it into something you actually chose.” For journalists, the story isn’t simply “screens are bad.” It’s that passive, algorithm-driven scrolling is where comparison, FOMO and emotional overload tend to pile up and that helping people change how they use their devices may be more realistic, and more effective, than focusing on raw minutes alone. Featured Experts Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW – Psychotherapist specializing in ADHD, anxiety, insomnia and digital dependency. She helps teens and adults understand how doomscrolling and passive feeds hijack dopamine and mood, and teaches practical shifts toward more intentional, “active” tech use. Eli Singer – Founder of Offline.now and author of Offline.now: A Practical Guide to Healthy Digital Balance. He brings proprietary data on digital overwhelm and the “confidence gap,” and shows how 20-minute “micro-wins” like upgrading one chunk of passive screen time can change people’s relationship with their phones without extreme detoxes. Expert interviews can be arranged through the Offline.now media team.
Domestic abuse affects millions of people every year, often in unseen and deeply personal ways, and online threats toward victims can be particularly harmful. To address this reality locally, the University of Florida’s Center for Privacy and Security for Marginalized and Vulnerable Populations, or PRISM, works with Gainesville-based domestic abuse support center Peaceful Paths to help people stay safe in the digital world. Kevin Butler, Ph.D., the director of PRISM and the Florida Institute for Cybersecurity Research at UF, has been researching issues related to security and privacy of technologies that affect survivors of intimate partner violence for years. He and his graduate students connected with Peaceful Paths in 2022, presenting their findings on cybersecurity and demonstrating how their research may help improve online safety for vulnerable populations. They developed a pilot study, a survey and interview protocols that are now helping those in need at the center. “[We aim to] develop principles of design that will allow for a robust technology design that really mitigates harms and improves benefits for all,” Butler said about PRISM. Educating abuse survivors has been a key component of the collaboration between UF and Peaceful Paths. For example, PRISM’s team has conducted research on the effects of stalkerware, also known as spyware, which is a type of software or app designed to be installed secretly on people’s devices to monitor their activities without their consent. Abusers may use this tool to track and harass victims, and stalkerware is regularly linked to domestic violence – a fact that is not widely known. "Even the first presentation [UF] gave enhanced our advocates' knowledge of security pieces, which helps them safety plan with survivors," said Peaceful Paths CEO Crystal Sorrow. “It actually increases the safety of everyone in the community we work with when we talk about red flags, digital dating abuse and healthy relationships.” While PRISM, which is supported by the National Science Foundation, is making an impact on the local community, its overall reach is much broader. PRISM was the first academic partner in the Coalition Against Stalkerware, which includes groups such as the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and law enforcement agencies throughout the United States and the world.
We Don’t Realize How Much Time We Spend With AI. Because It’s Hiding in Our Phones
If you ask most people how often they use AI, they’ll say something like: “I tried ChatGPT a couple of times” or “I don’t really use AI.” But look at their phone, and the story is completely different. Digital wellness platform Offline.now has found that we already spend about 10 of our 16 waking hours on screens, roughly 63% of our day. Founder Eli Singer calls AI “the shadow roommate inside those 10 hours”: invisible most of the time, but involved in more of our everyday taps and swipes than we realize. And we now have data to prove it. A recent Talker Research survey of 2,000 U.S. adults, commissioned by Samsung, found that 90% of Americans use AI features on their phones, but only 38% realize it. Common features like weather alerts, call screening, autocorrect, night-mode camera enhancements and auto-brightness are all powered by AI — yet more than half of respondents initially said they don’t use AI at all. Once shown a list of features, 86% admitted they use AI tools daily. (Lifewire) Singer sees this as a classic “confidence gap” problem applied to AI. Beyond the “invisible AI” on our phones, generative AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude and image generators are spreading fast. A nationally representative U.S. survey from Harvard’s Kennedy School and the Real-Time Population Survey found that by August 2024, about 39% of adults aged 18–64 were using generative AI. More than 24% of workers had used it at least once in the previous week, and nearly 1 in 9 used it every single workday. (NBER) Globally, usage is enormous. A World Bank backed analysis of online activity estimated that, as of March 2024, the top 40 generative AI tools attracted nearly 3 billion visits per month from hundreds of millions of users. ChatGPT alone commanded about 82.5% of that traffic. (Open Knowledge Repository) From a mental-health perspective, psychotherapist Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW says the issue isn’t just the number of visits, it’s the way AI subtly shapes the texture of our day. “Every autocorrect, every AI-sorted inbox, every ‘magic’ photo fix is a tiny cognitive hand-off,” she explains. “Individually they feel helpful. But taken together, they keep your brain in a constant state of micro-decisions and micro-rewards, which is exhausting, especially if you already struggle with ADHD, anxiety or overwhelm.” She points out that many of her clients only think of “AI time” as the hours they spend in a chatbot window. In reality, AI is involved when: Their phone decides which notifications to surface A map app reroutes them automatically Spam filters silently screen hundreds of emails “By the time they open a dedicated AI app, their nervous system has already been engaging with AI-driven features all day,” Sritharan says. “That’s part of why people end the day feeling tapped out but can’t quite explain why.” Singer worries that this “shadow AI” is quietly eating into the same finite resource Offline.now tracks with screens in general: attention. “We already know 10 hours a day on screens is unsustainable for our focus and our relationships,” he says. “Layer AI on top — systems designed to predict and nudge our behavior — and you’re not just losing time. You’re outsourcing micro-chunks of judgment, memory and choice without even noticing.” So how much time are people spending with AI? Right now, no one has a perfect number and that’s exactly the point. The best data we have suggests: Most smartphone users are already interacting with AI daily, whether they know it or not. (Lifewire) Roughly 4 in 10 U.S. adults now use generative AI, with a growing share using it at work every week or every day. (Harvard Kennedy School) Globally, billions of monthly visits are flowing into AI tools on top of our existing 10-hour screen days. (Open Knowledge Repository) “The future isn’t AI or no AI,” Singer says. “It’s: Can you be conscious about how you use it — instead of letting it hijack your attention and manage your life?” Featured Experts Eli Singer – Founder of Offline.now and author of Offline.now: A Practical Guide to Healthy Digital Balance. He brings proprietary behavioral data on screen time and digital overwhelm, and a framework (the Offline.now Matrix) for rebuilding confidence through 20-minute, real-world steps instead of all-or-nothing “detox” advice. Harshi Sritharan, MSW, RSW – Psychotherapist specializing in ADHD, anxiety and digital dependency. She explains how AI-assisted micro-tasks interact with dopamine, attention and overwhelm, and offers brain-friendly ways to renegotiate your relationship with both screens and AI. Expert interviews can be arranged through the Offline.now media team.