Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Summary: The article explores the Fear of Running Out (FORO), a psychological phenomenon that stems from anxiety about resource scarcity, particularly in retirement. FORO is especially common among seniors who fear depleting their financial, physical, or emotional resources as they age. Unlike FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), FORO focuses on the depletion of existing assets, often leading to cautious decision-making, delayed spending, or self-sabotaging behaviours like excessive frugality or social withdrawal. While some instances of FORO are valid—such as retirees who underestimated their living expenses—others are more psychological, with financially secure individuals still feeling paralyzed by fear and unable to enjoy their retirement fully. There are practical solutions, but they require more than just emotional support. We also need to address the lack of formal retirement planning and literacy. Most retirees have insufficient knowledge about tax-efficient asset drawdowns, and the limited guidance from financial institutions exacerbates these fears. We’ve all heard of FOMO (fear of missing out)—that nagging anxiety when everyone else seems to be at a fabulous party while you’re at home scrolling through social media, eating last night’s leftovers straight from the container. As we age, the fears we carry evolve—and for some, they get a little louder, quirkier, and much more challenging to ignore. A unique set of acronyms has emerged for older adults to describe these creeping anxieties. Allow me to introduce you to the unholy trinity of aging fears: FOGO (Fear of Getting Old): This one typically kicks in around our mid-to-late 50s when the realization hits and panic sets in: "Wait... I’m not young anymore?" Have I saved enough? Have I experienced enough? Am I running out of time? Cue the classic symptoms: splurging on bright red sports cars, embarking on bucket-list trips to exotic locales, or dating someone who knows what "Netflix and chill" really means, not cozying up with a movie. And yes, sometimes while still married. It’s all part of the "midlife crisis" package—a desperate attempt to outrun Father Time. But let’s be honest: The comb-over isn’t fooling anyone. FOBO (Fear of Being Old): This stage sneaks in during your 70s, as your "best before" date blinks ominously on life’s metaphorical packaging. Many enter into a state of "defensive denial," refusing to acknowledge their age or any limitations, insisting they are still as capable as ever, even when struggling with specific tasks. In this stage, people can demonstrate "overcompensation - Desperately trying to prove they’re still youthful. Many will refuse to use mobility aids or decline assistance from family or caregivers out of pride. Others will shut down anyone who dares to suggest they are old. “Me? Old? Please. I just got a brand-new hip last year!” FORO (Fear of Running Out): Now we get to the show's real star. FORO enters the spotlight as you thoughtfully consider retirement and suddenly takes over the plot. It’s the fear of running out—of money, energy, time, or maybe even snacks at movie night. This one’s a relentless buzz in the background of every decision, from how you spend your savings to whether you should buy name-brand peanut butter or settle for the generic jar. If left unchecked, FORO can steal the joy out of today by worrying too much about tomorrow. We have all heard the stories of people passing away with millions of dollars in the bank, yet they lived in squalor, afraid to spend their money. Now, FORO can manifest in all kinds of ways. Some are almost funny in hindsight. Remember the pandemic toilet paper wars of 2020? Or that panic at a party when you’re convinced you don’t have enough food for your guests, only to find yourself drowning in leftovers? But for seniors in retirement, FORO often takes on a much more serious tone—like running out of money, energy, or health as the years go by. These thoughts can be terrifying for the aged. And sometimes, this fear is warranted. Imagine a retiree who underestimated their living expenses, burned through savings too quickly, and now faces the stark reality of financial insecurity. That’s a legitimate case of FORO that demands attention, planning, and maybe a shift in lifestyle. But other times, FORO is more like a shadow in the dark—unsettling at first glance but harmless once illuminated. For example, some seniors with reasonable pensions, savings, and even supplemental income streams might still be too paralyzed by the fear of running out to take that dream vacation or help their grandchildren with school. In this situation, it is doubtful that there will ever be enough. This type of FORO can cause harm through neglect. This unfounded FORO can keep people from genuinely thriving during their golden years. There are well-documented cases of individuals who have perished from thirst in the desert while carrying full bottles of water. They were too frightened of running out of water to save their lives by drinking it. Most of us shake our heads and think we would never do that, but FORO represents a compelling fear that can lead to self-sabotaging behaviours. If FORO could result in death in the aforementioned desert scenario, how might it influence decisions regarding our significant assets, such as our homes? Unfortunately, many retirees pinch pennies and go without while living in homes with considerable equity, refusing to access it for fear of running out (FORO). So, how do we know when FORO is a valid warning signal and when it’s just a psychological hurdle? And, more importantly, how can we tackle this fear to ensure it doesn’t stand in the way of living a joyful, fulfilled retirement? Read on; we’ll dive deeper into the concept of FORO—why it exists, how it can sneak into our decision-making, and, most importantly, actionable strategies to manage it. Remember, your golden years shouldn’t be ruled by fear—they should be a time to shine. The Fear of Running Out (FORO) is a psychological concept rooted in anxiety about scarcity or insufficiency, particularly concerning essential resources like money, time, or opportunities. It's akin to FOMO (Fear of Missing Out), but instead emphasizes the anxiety of depleting one's existing resources rather than worrying about missed experiences. While FORO has not been as widely studied as FOMO in academic circles, the term has gained traction in financial and psychological contexts, particularly regarding retirement planning, economic behaviour, and decision-making. Although it’s unclear who explicitly popularized the term “Fear of Running Out,” it has become a recurring theme in financial planning discussions and among behavioural psychologists studying how individuals manage uncertainty and risk. The Psychology of FORO FORO is deeply rooted in psychological concepts of scarcity and loss aversion, both key ideas in behavioural economics. Loss aversion, central to Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s prospect theory, highlights that the pain of losing something outweighs the joy of gaining an equivalent amount. In the context of retirement, the fear of running out of money reflects this principle—financial depletion carries the weight of losing essential aspects like security, independence, and quality of life, making it feel particularly distressing. The work of researchers like Eldar Shafir and Senthil Mullainathan on the scarcity mindset further illuminates this phenomenon. They suggest that when people are preoccupied with avoiding resource depletion, they often develop tunnel vision, focusing narrowly on the immediate issue. For seniors worried about outliving their savings, this can manifest as excessive caution or hesitation in deciding to spend or draw down resources, even when such concerns may not be warranted. Faced with this dilemma, some seniors develop inertia, choose to do nothing, and ignore the situation altogether. According to a 2024 report by the Ontario Securities Commission, 13% of pre-retirees and 19% of retirees among Canadians aged 50 and older have a formal written retirement plan, which is a significant cause for concern. This reflects a widespread lack of structured financial and retirement literacy. Without a clear strategy, many individuals may not fully understand how to manage their resources effectively throughout retirement, particularly when it comes to de-accumulating (spending) assets in a tax-efficient manner. We can quickly start to see why many older Canadians have FORO. One key issue is that minimal accessible information exists on strategies for drawing down retirement savings to minimize taxes while ensuring long-term financial security. For example, the timing and order in which individuals withdraw from registered accounts like RRSPs, TFSAs, non-registered investments, or access their home equity can dramatically impact their overall tax burden and available income in retirement. Unfortunately, this type of guidance is often overlooked in financial planning resources, leaving most retirees guessing how much money is enough. The financial industry also contributes to this gap. Banks and many financial advisors are primarily compensated through commissions tied to the sale and management of investments, such as mutual funds or other financial products. This model does not incentivize them to provide comprehensive advice on strategically spending down savings. As a result, many seniors are left without the critical guidance they need to navigate the complexities of de-accumulation, leading to suboptimal emotionally driven decisions and increased financial stress. This lack of tailored advice is particularly problematic for Canadians who rely on paying off their homes as their primary financial plan. While homeownership is a valuable asset, it is not liquid, and converting it into usable retirement income can be challenging without proper planning. The fear of running out of money (FORO) becomes especially acute for these individuals, as they may not have the financial and retirement literacy or tools to make informed decisions about how to fund their retirement, especially concerning using home equity. In short, the low prevalence of formal retirement plans, insufficient education on tax-efficient de-accumulation, and the misaligned incentives of financial institutions significantly disadvantage seniors. This gap exacerbates financial insecurity and leaves many retirees vulnerable to the psychological and practical challenges of FORO, particularly those who rely on home equity, an illiquid asset, as their primary financial safety net. Addressing these issues requires a broader emphasis on financial and retirement literacy and unbiased, accessible advice tailored to retirees' unique needs. Key Components of FORO: 1. Scarcity Mindset—Seniors facing FORO might develop a scarcity mindset, which can lead to overly frugal behaviours. For example, they may reduce spending on essential support services or forego social activities to protect their savings, even when financially secure. 2. Emotional Triggers—FORO is tied to deeper emotional needs like safety, independence, and legacy. At its core is the fear that people will have nowhere to live, won’t have enough money to care for themselves, and will not have any money left to leave a legacy. 3. Decision Paralysis - FORO can cause retirees to delay allocating resources, from downsizing a home to sourcing pension-type income. This indecision can lead to missed opportunities or unnecessary sacrifices. 4. Overcompensation—In some cases, the fear of running out can lead to self-sabotage behaviours like hoarding money or withdrawing from social activities. These behaviours reduce quality of life and increase feelings of isolation. The Solution: A comprehensive approach that combines emotional support, practical planning, and mindset adjustments is essential to helping retirees overcome FORO. By addressing their fears and financial realities, they can gain the confidence to enjoy their retirement years without worrying about running out of money. 1. Acknowledgement and Understanding - Listen and empathize: Begin by genuinely listening to the retiree's concerns, recognizing that FORO is an emotional issue tied to deep-seated fears about security and independence. Normalize the fear: Reassure them that the fear of running out of money is common, especially in retirement. Explain the reasons behind this fear: Retirees often can’t return to work to supplement income. Lifespans and healthcare costs are unpredictable, creating uncertainty. The transition from accumulating wealth to spending it feels unnatural to many. 2. Develop a Retirement Spending Plan—Create a tailored plan. Outline a sustainable spending strategy aligning with the client's lifestyle, goals, and resources: Leverage expertise: Collaborate with their bank manager or financial advisor to develop a realistic budget covering essential and discretionary expenses. Focus on balance: Establish a balance between meeting current needs and maintaining future security. 3. Generate Pension-Like Income - Explore income solutions: Help them research ways to create predictable income streams, such as: Purchasing an annuity to convert part of their savings or equity into guaranteed income. Consider equity mortgage products for additional cash flow if they have sufficient home equity. Address misconceptions: Explain how these tools can reduce uncertainty and provide peace of mind. 4. Emergency Fund - Health care may be needed later in life and can be costly. Setting money aside for unexpected expenses will offer great comfort and peace of mind. 5. Mindset Shifts - Reframe perspectives: Encourage retirees to focus on the opportunities their resources provide rather than fixating on worst-case scenarios: Promote enjoyment: Remind them that retirement is a time to enjoy the fruits of their labour, not live in constant fear. Highlight the importance of self-care and experiences that bring joy and fulfillment. 6. Legacy Planning - Address legacy concerns: Help them create an estate plan or designate resources for loved ones and causes they care about, ensuring their wishes are honoured: Provide clarity: Show how planning for a legacy can reduce anxiety about leaving something behind while meeting their current needs. The Fear of Running Out is more than just a financial concern—it’s a deeply emotional and psychological issue for seniors facing the unpredictability of retirement. By addressing this fear in practical and empathetic ways, we can give retirees the tools and confidence to enjoy their golden years without worrying about depletion or feeling like they need to stockpile financial "water bottles" for a drought that may never come. And there you have it—FORO might be a formidable guest at the retirement table, but it doesn’t have to steal the show. By addressing the emotional roots of this fear, creating practical plans, and shifting the focus to what’s possible, retirees can turn their golden years into precisely that: golden. Remember, retirement isn’t about tiptoeing around scarcity; it’s about celebrating a lifetime of hard work and savouring the moments that make life rich. So, let’s leave FORO in the shadows where it belongs and step confidently into a retirement that truly shines. And let’s be honest, no one wants their legacy to read: "Lived frugally, died rich, and missed the Boat to the Caribbean." Don't retire---Re-Wire! Sue
A Bumpy Ride Ahead for HigherEd
A confluence of political, economic, and social challenges is threatening the very fabric of US universities. In both red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds facing institutions are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. Universities find themselves squeezed by funding cuts, scrutinized by lawmakers, and caught in cultural crossfire. This presents a unique challenge for communications professionals. In this era of declining trust and “alternative facts,” they need to be hyper-informed, adapt quickly, and boldly emphasize the critical value institutions have in society. Communications should function as a vital link, bridging this growing divide between town and gown. In red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds hitting higher education are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. It's important to note that throughout history, universities often emerge stronger and more deeply connected to the public during times of turbulence. Universities played a key role in partnering with the government to implement Roosevelt's New Deal, helping with emergency relief and agricultural programs. They helped democratize education with the GI Bill after World War II. They responded to societal demands during the civil rights era. Most recently, they played a key role in public health amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Campus communicators have a unique set of skills and a vital responsibility to steer their institutions through these tough times. But the road ahead will be hard. The New Reality for Campus Communicators Cuts to Research Funding The lifeblood of academic innovation—research dollars—is under threat. The new political regime in Washington is looking to cut billions in federal research funding. A sudden cap on NIH indirect costs (slashed to 15% from an average of 28%) will have a profound impact on programs. Many researchers report that major grants are frozen or are expected to shrink. This “budget axe” isn’t theoretical for research universities—it’s biting right now. Communicators must convey what’s at stake: essential contributions such as groundbreaking science, community health programs, and innovation pipelines that fuel the economy hang in the balance as money gets tighter. Increasing State Oversight & Regulation In state capitals, politicians are muscling into campus affairs like never before. Republican-controlled statehouses are overhauling higher education governance, introducing over 150 bills in 35 states aimed at tightening control over public institutions. Even tenure is threatened. In the past year, lawmakers in seven states moved to eliminate or curb tenure and impose stricter post-tenure reviews – an unprecedented encroachment on academic freedom. New laws and proposals are creating oversight committees, mandating changes to the curriculum, and even threatening funding for programs out of political favor. The message from some state capitols is clear: “We’re watching you.” This surge in oversight and regulatory meddling means university communicators must navigate an increasingly fine line, demonstrating transparency and accountability at every turn to appease regulators while fiercely defending their institution’s academic autonomy. Political Pressure and DEI Backlash Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are under open attack. What began as partisan rhetoric has evolved into concrete threats – and actions – against campus diversity efforts. Dozens of states have passed or proposed laws to defund DEI offices, ban diversity training, or restrict teaching about race and gender. The result? An “inconsistent and confusing landscape” for colleges as they respond to swelling political pressure. The campaign against campus DEI has dramatically accelerated in 2025, turbocharged by signals from the Trump administration pushing to eliminate DEI efforts across government and higher ed. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education 270 campuses in 38 states have already scaled back or dismantled some DEI programs under this pressure. For communications teams, the DEI backlash creates a messaging minefield. They must affirm institutional values of inclusion and support for marginalized groups, even as those very programs face hostile scrutiny from powerful critics. Threats to the Federal Department of Education In Washington, the unthinkable is suddenly on the table: the U.S. Department of Education itself is in the crosshairs. President Trump has made good on campaign promises by signing an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education. While outright abolition requires Congress, the administration has already laid off nearly half of the department’s staff and moved to strip the agency to its bare bones. “We’re going to shut it down… it’s doing us no good,” Trump declared. This unprecedented move could upend federal support and guidelines for universities – from financial aid administration to civil rights enforcement – leaving states to fill the void. Communications professionals must reassure students, faculty, and the public that education won’t grind to a halt if federal oversight wanes. It’s a communications tightrope: acknowledging the potential for massive change while conveying stability in the university’s core mission. After all, even if Washington pulls back, universities still answer to accreditation bodies and the public trust. The Misinformation Deluge on Social Media The information ecosystem has never been more chaotic – or more dangerous. Universities are grappling with viral misinformation and disinformation that can ignite campus controversies overnight. In the age of TikTok rumors and politicized Twitter (or “X”) feeds, false narratives spread like wildfire before facts can catch up. Recent campus incidents have shown how quickly truth gets muddled: one university saw fake reports about a protest spread widely. At the same time, another dealt with a gross misinterpretation of a student gathering that went viral. Photos and videos are routinely ripped out of context or deliberately edited with misleading labels. The public, meanwhile, is “bombarded with misinformation” online and growing distrustful of experts. For higher ed communicators, countering misinformation means fighting a two-front war: rapidly correcting falsehoods about their institution and proactively pushing out accurate, compelling content to capture attention before the rumors do. Economic Uncertainty and Budget Turbulence. Even aside from targeted funding cuts, universities are feeling economic whiplash. Inflation, endowment fluctuations, and post-pandemic enrolment dips have collided to squeeze campus finances. Many institutions face structural deficits and tough choices about programs and staffing. In fact, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, two-thirds of colleges now show at least one sign of financial stress – a startling statistic that underscores how widespread the budget crunch has become. From flagship public universities to small private colleges, hiring freezes and spending cuts are the order of the day. Every dollar is scrutinized by trustees and legislators alike. Communications pros must now operate in a climate of fiscal anxiety, where messages about any new initiative or expense can trigger questions about priorities. The task at hand is to highlight the university’s economic stewardship and continued value to students and the community, even as belts tighten. It’s critical to communicate that the institution is navigating the storm responsibly—protecting its academic core and maximizing the impact of every precious dollar. Demands to Prove Real-world Impact “What is higher ed really doing for society?” In 2025, that question echoes from state capitols, donors’ boards, and kitchen tables across America. Universities are under intense pressure to demonstrate the real-world value of their research and teaching like never before. Lawmakers openly discuss ROI (return on investment) for degrees and research grants, seeking data on graduates’ earnings and innovations spawned per taxpayer dollar. Public confidence in higher education has been shaken – a recent Gallup survey found Americans’ confidence in colleges has plummeted to 36%, down from 57% in 2015. Many believe in personal value (a college degree for better jobs) but doubt that higher education delivers for the greater good. In short, the public is skeptical whether campus research and scholarship are worth the cost. University communicators must do more than publicize exciting discoveries – they must connect the dots for people. Every media release, story, or tweet should answer: Here’s how this university’s work benefits you, your community, and the world. Whether it’s a medical breakthrough, a tech startup from the lab, or a student project solving a local problem, the mandate is clear: show impact or risk losing support. In my next post, I'll provide a detailed blueprint to help communications professionals proactively plan and organize their teams for the road ahead. This actionable framework will help you better identify where you can add value for your institution where it needs it the most and confirm your critical role as a trusted resource. To your success! Upcoming Speaking Events April 23 PRSA Virtual Workshop "Cutting Through the Noise: What Thought Leadership Strategies are Working in Today’s Environment” Register Here June 8 IABC World Conference, Vancouver “The Thought Leadership Blueprint: Why & How to Build a High-Impact Program” Register Here Sept. 12-13 PRSA East Central Conference, Cleveland “The New Comms Leadership Skillset” Register Here About ExpertFile ExpertFile is revolutionizing how organizations connect their experts to journalists, podcasters, and conference organizers who need to find credible experts on tight deadlines…fast. Featuring experts on over 50,000 topics, our free Apple and Android mobile app is the go-to resource for journalists at media outlets such as the New York Times, CNN, NPR Radio, Fox News, BBC, The Guardian, ABC News, CBC, AXIOS and Time Magazine. For over a decade, our award-winning software platform has been helping marketing departments better manage and promote their online thought leadership to reach a wider audience. Clients include Carnegie Mellon University, ChristianaCare Health, Villanova University, Aston University and Emory University. Learn more at: expertfile.com/getstarted
Hundreds of nurses and their colleagues at ChristianaCare gathered in a conference room at Christiana Hospital and listened through a livestream across the organization’s campuses and practices for an announcement they’ve been anticipating for many months. “For your commitment to nursing excellence and quality care, we are thrilled to recognize ChristianaCare with its fourth consecutive Magnet designation,” said David Marshall, JD, DNP, RN, chair of the American Nurses Credentialing Center’s Commission on Magnet Recognition. “This accomplishment is a powerful testament to your dedication to the nurses who practice there, the entire health care team, and — most importantly — the patients you serve.” Shouts erupted, balloons and streamers floated up and, in the happy commotion, there was even a little cowbell. As the only four-time Magnet-designated health care organization in Delaware, ChristianaCare has achieved this global recognition — the highest honor in nursing practice — for continued dedication to excellence and innovation, high-quality patient care and experience, nurse engagement and work culture. “Magnet designation recognizes ChristianaCare nurses are simply the best!” said ChristianaCare President and CEO Janice E. Nevin, M.D., MPH. “A fourth Magnet designation is an incredible achievement and reflects the vital importance and commitment of our nurses as we serve together with love and excellence.” ChristianaCare has more than 3,000 nurses, and they make up the largest segment of ChristianaCare’s workforce. ChristianaCare is the largest nonprofit organization and private employer in the state of Delaware. This most recent designation for ChristianaCare includes Christiana Hospital, Wilmington Hospital, ChristianaCare HomeHealth and Community Care Services, through early 2029. What it means to be Magnet “Our fourth consecutive Magnet designation means that our nurses and all of our caregiver colleagues have upheld the ANCC’s very high standards in patient care since our first recognition in 2010,” said ChristianaCare Chief Nurse Executive Danielle Weber, DNP, RN. “That is a long time to bring your ‘A’ game every day — through 15 years of change, including a pandemic — and to sustain growth in professional practice, innovation and culture. Magnet recognition raises the bar for patient care and inspires every member of our team to achieve excellence every day.” The Magnet Recognition Program — administered by the American Nurses Credentialing Center, the largest and most prominent nurses credentialing organization in the world — identifies health care organizations that provide the very best in nursing care, exceptional nurse engagement and professionalism in nursing practice. The Magnet Recognition Program serves as the gold standard for nursing excellence and provides consumers with the ultimate benchmark for measuring quality of care. The ANCC Magnet Recognition Program® has conferred Magnet status to less than 10% of hospitals and health systems in the United States. There are 621 Magnet-designated health organizations internationally. ChristianaCare was the first in Delaware to achieve Magnet designation, in 2010. For nurses, Magnet Recognition means education and development through every career stage, which leads to greater autonomy at the bedside. For patients, it means the very best care, delivered by nurses who are supported to be the very best that they can be. While Magnet is a nursing-led initiative, the designation reflects the work of caregivers across the organization. Magnet redesignation itself is a rigorous process. Health care organizations must reapply for Magnet status every four years and demonstrate adherence to the Magnet concepts for nursing excellence and engagement and measurable improvements in patient care and quality. The ANCC commended ChristianaCare on these exemplars: Advocacy for and acquisition of organizational resources specific to nurses’ well-being. particularly through the Nursing Integrative Care Program. An innovative strategy to address the shortage of certified registered nurse anesthetists in Delaware through a partnership program between ChristianaCare and Wilmington University to launch the state’s first Nurse Anesthesiology program. Outstanding nursing research engagement and growth of the nursing research enterprise especially through the Nursing Research Fellowship in Robotics and Innovation.
Lessons Learned in Pandemic Preparedness
Dr. Martine Hackett, associate professor and chair of Hofstra’s Department of Population Health talked to Newsday about Long Island’s level of preparedness for another pandemic. In 2020, “there really was no sense of what needed to be done,” and how to coordinate efforts, she said. “I think Long Island now understands what is required in terms of cooperation across health systems, health departments and the community.”
Villanova Professor Sees Costs and Benefits in Corporate and Federal Return-to-Office Mandates
In early February, federal agencies submitted plans in accordance with an executive order to initiate an estimated 1 million government employees’ full-time return to their duty stations. The departments’ actions are among the latest in a series of RTO moves enacted since the start of 2025. Notably, they follow policy changes by corporate giants Amazon, AT&T and JPMorgan, who in January began requiring five days of in-person work for select staffers, with justifications ranging from strengthening culture to improving performance. With more employers expected to require in-office work in the coming months, some predict that 2025 could be the “year of the RTO mandate.” But, given the arguments from those pushing for these policies, it’s worth asking: Are these return-to-office requirements truly justified? Do they actually improve communication, strengthen teams and boost productivity, as supporters claim? According to Kyoung Yong Kim, PhD, whose research focuses on telework, strategic human capital management and employee-organization relationships, the answer is complicated—and highly circumstantial. Dr. Kim says that, by gathering coworkers around the proverbial water cooler, RTO policies can in some cases facilitate dialogue, promote teambuilding and foster organizational success. Yet, in other instances, work-from-home (WFH) arrangements can significantly boost employee morale, efficiency and output. “In a recent paper, my colleague Ijeoma Ugwuanyi [a professor at Hong Kong Metropolitan University] and I examined how social distancing initiatives, which reduce interactions among people, impact working relationships,” says Dr. Kim. “We found that they can actually help improve negative ones, at least in employees’ minds.” Analyzing data collected on 105 working relationships among 43 full-time personnel at a South Korean healthcare company, Dr. Kim and Dr. Ugwuanyi discovered that, when afforded extended WFH privileges, colleagues previously at odds were given the space necessary to reassess their outlooks and improve their dynamics—especially when the individuals involved were viewed as competent and warm. As a result, these repaired relationships generally empowered more effective collaboration in the long run. Additionally, employees with positive in-person relationships maintained a solid rapport even when geographically apart. “These findings are particularly relevant as corporate and government workers increasingly return to their offices,” says Dr. Kim. “Managers need to remember that, according to the research, employees are willing to reset negative relationships they had previously. That said, returning to the office also offers a chance to strengthen relationships and make them more positive, which is crucial since team dynamics are a key determinant of team performance.” Per Dr. Kim, in order to best position themselves for success on the RTO front, organizations need to take a measured, sympathetic approach in facilitating their in-office policies, with an eye toward mitigating negativity. They need to remain cognizant of the logistical and interpersonal challenges that could emerge in the wake of a return, address their employees’ concerns in an attentive manner and foster a “supportive climate characterized by supportive behaviors.” It’s a situation that Dr. Kim says bears parallels—perhaps somewhat counterintuitively—to the mass shift to telework that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. As he found in his research on that phenomenon, employees responded best to changes in their working arrangements when organizational leaders and managers took the time to explain and actively discuss the reasoning behind them, especially in mission-driven terms. “Essentially, an important implication of the findings is that, to sustain employees’ positive attitudes and behaviors, it is crucial to frame these moves in a way that highlights how working in the office benefits both employees and the organization,” says Dr. Kim. In turn, RTO-focused organizations should recognize that their words and messages have a very real impact, particularly when scrutinized by workers who may not be happy about resuming their morning commutes. “Amazon, for instance, appears to be taking a thoughtful approach by emphasizing the value of collaboration with colleagues and the enrichment of organizational culture,” says Dr. Kim. “One potential drawback, however, lies in their message about the consequences of non-compliance, specifically that failure to adhere to the in-office policy could jeopardize employees’ chances of promotion. “A more positive framing, emphasizing how such policies support professional growth as well as employees’ well-being, could enhance favorable perceptions and work behaviors.” In the event organizations remain attuned to such situations—taking their employees’ perspectives into account, actively communicating their intentions and presenting clear value propositions—Dr. Kim thinks a year of the RTO mandate could potentially be a less daunting prospect. And maybe, with time, the transition back from Zoom to the boardroom could be a beneficial one.
Avian Flu: Understanding the Threat and Global Response
Avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu, is a highly contagious viral infection that affects birds but has the potential to spread to humans and other animals. With recent outbreaks raising concerns among health officials worldwide, understanding the origins, transmission, and potential risks of avian flu is critical for public health preparedness. The virus poses significant threats to global food supply chains, economic stability in agriculture, and pandemic prevention efforts. As governments and health agencies monitor the situation, the public must stay informed about the latest developments and protective measures. Key story angles include: Origins and Evolution of Avian Flu: How the virus emerges, mutates, and spreads among birds and humans. Public Health Risks and Prevention Measures: Assessing the likelihood of human transmission and the effectiveness of vaccines and treatments. Economic Impact on Poultry and Agriculture: How outbreaks affect food production, trade restrictions, and industry regulations. Global Response and Preparedness Efforts: What governments and health organizations are doing to contain outbreaks and prevent a pandemic. Wildlife and Environmental Factors: The role of migratory birds in spreading avian flu and the impact of climate change on disease patterns. Lessons from Past Outbreaks: Comparing the current situation to previous bird flu strains and what history teaches us about managing the threat. As concerns over avian flu grow, staying ahead of the science and policy responses will be key to safeguarding public health and economic stability worldwide. Connect with an expert about avian flu: To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com
Annual Healthy Georgia Report looks at public health in the Peach State
The fourth edition of the “Healthy Georgia: Our State of Public Health” report has been released by the Institute of Public and Preventive Health in Augusta University’s School of Public Health. Within the 64 pages of the report is a snapshot of how healthy Georgians are compared to citizens across the 12 states that make up the Southeastern Region (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia) and the entire United States. The 2025 edition addresses 31 health topics and has been expanded this year to include multimorbidity; long COVID-19; HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis infection rates; opioid and methamphetamine drug use; suicides; and vaping. Biplab Datta, PhD, assistant professor in the Department of Health Management, Economics, and Policy in SPH, heads up the team of IPPH faculty and staff who create the report each year. Datta credits Jen Jaremski, research associate, and Kit Wooten, public health analyst, with handling much of the work of bringing the report to life. Together, Jaremski and Wooten collected and organized all of the needed assets and organized the 64-page document, preparing it for print and the web. “Every year we strive to present data in a way that policymakers may find helpful in making policy choices,” Datta said. “There are several new topics that were added to this year’s report and some of those are concerning for the state of Georgia, particularly the communicable diseases like HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis. High prevalence rates of these conditions in Georgia, compared to the rest of the U.S. and the Southeastern Region, warrant attention of the public health community.” Georgia has the second-highest rate of HIV infections in the U.S., fourth-highest rates of gonorrhea, sixth-highest for chlamydia and 13th for syphilis. Something that is also new in this year’s report is a comparison of numbers from 2019, or before the COVID-19 pandemic began, compared to after the pandemic for certain conditions. Also coming out of the pandemic, the report looks at how long COVID has affected Georgians, with the state ranking 24th in the nation for rates of long COVID. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, long COVID is defined as a chronic condition that occurs after COVID-19 infection and is present for at least three months. On top of looking at comparisons between Georgia and the Southeast and the nation, Datta noted a clearer picture is starting to emerge concerning the difference in urban and rural areas within the state. “For several chronic conditions, like hypertension, diabetes and multimorbidity, we clearly see a striking difference between rural and urban residents of Georgia,” Datta said. Hypertension affects 44.1% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 35% in urban areas, while diabetes affects 17.5% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 12.3% of those in urban areas. Hypertension and diabetes are major risk factors for cardiovascular disease, which affects 12.2% of adults in rural areas compared to 8.3% of adults in urban areas of Georgia. “Hypertension and diabetes are the major risk factors for heart disease, which is the leading cause of death in the U.S. and worldwide, so these are some concerning numbers to see,” Datta said. Multimorbidity, which is when a person has multiple chronic conditions, including obesity, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, cardiovascular disease, cancer, skin cancer and arthritis, affects 57.4% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 49% of adults in urban areas of the state. These rates are significantly lower than the rest of the Southeast but on par with the rest of the country. When comparing Georgia to the U.S. national average, adults in Georgia have lower rates of cancer and methamphetamine use but higher rates of childhood asthma and adult obesity. At the same time, rates of adult asthma and adult obesity among Georgians were comparable to the averages seen in the Southeast. Interestingly, while adult health insurance coverage was significantly lower than the U.S. national and Southeast Regional averages, the child health insurance coverage in Georgia was comparable to both national and regional averages. The Healthy Georgia Report is the only report of its kind in the state Looking to know more or connect with Biplab Datta, PhD? Then let us help. Dr. Datta is available to speak with media regarding this important topic. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Researchers looked at trust in scientists in 68 countries and found relatively high levels of trust everywhere The TISP Many Labs study of 71,922 people included those living in under-researched nations of the Global South The majority of survey participants believe that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. Public trust in scientists is still high, according to a survey carried out in 68 countries by an international team of 241 researchers, led by Dr Viktoria Cologna (Harvard University, ETH Zurich) and Dr Niels Mede (University of Zurich). The study found no evidence of the oft-repeated claim of a crisis of trust in science. The team, which included Aston University School of Psychology’s Dr James Reynolds and Dr Charlotte Pennington, also found that the majority of survey participants believed that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. This study is the result of the Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism (TISP) Many Labs study, a collaborative effort that allowed the authors to survey 71,922 people in 68 countries, including many under-researched countries in the ‘Global South’. For the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic, the study provides global, representative survey data on the populations and regions of the world in which researchers are perceived to be most trustworthy, the extent to which they should engage with the public and whether science is prioritising important research issues. Dr Mede said: “The study is the most comprehensive post-pandemic snapshot of trust in scientists, societal expectations of their involvement in society and policymaking and public views on research priorities.” Across 68 countries, the study finds that the majority of the public has a relatively high level of trust in scientists (mean trust level = 3.62, on a scale of 1 = very low trust to 5 = very high trust). The majority of respondents also perceive scientists as qualified (78%), honest (57%) and concerned about people’s wellbeing (56%). However, the results also reveal some areas of concern. Globally, less than half of respondents (42%) believe that scientists pay attention to the views of others. Additionally, many people felt that the priorities of science are not always well-aligned with their own priorities. The researchers call upon scientists to take the results seriously and find ways to be more receptive to feedback and more open to dialogue. The findings confirm the results of previous studies that show significant differences between countries and population groups. In particular, people with right-wing political views in Western countries tend to have less trust in scientists than those with left-wing views. This suggests that attitudes toward science tend to polarise along political lines. In most countries, however, political orientation and trust in scientists were not related. A majority of respondents want science to play an active role in society and policymaking. Globally, 83% of respondents believe that scientists should communicate with the public about science, providing an impetus for increased science communication efforts. Only a minority (23%) believe that scientists should not actively advocate for specific policies. 52% believe that scientists should be more involved in the policymaking process. Participants gave high priority to research to improve public health, solve energy problems and reduce poverty. On the other hand, research to develop defence and military technology was given a lower priority. In fact, participants explicitly believe that science is prioritising the development of defence and military technology more than they would like, highlighting a potential misalignment between public and scientific priorities. Dr Cologna said: “Our results show that most people in most countries have relatively high trust in scientists and want them to play an active role in society and policymaking”. Dr Reynolds, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This research demonstrates that people from all around the globe still have high trust in science and want scientists involved in policymaking. When we face great challenges, such as threats to public health or energy crises, the public recognise the importance that scientists can play and want us involved. This is also true of the UK where levels of public trust in science is one of the highest globally.” Dr Pennington, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This project showcases the importance and power of big team science to answer fundamental questions about human behaviour. By pooling our expertise and resources, we were able to reach over 70,000 people and improve sample diversity and representation by recruiting from 68 countries. Overall, the study resulted in an optimistic finding – that people generally trust scientists and agree that they should engage more in society and policymaking. Such trust is important because it allows people to make research-informed decisions about their own lives.” Find out more about the research in Nature Human Behaviour by visiting https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02090-5.
The Staff Wellbeing (SWell) project was carried out in conjunction with Birmingham Children’s Hospital and NHS England Paediatric critical care (PCC) staff experience high levels of moral distress, post-traumatic stress disorder and burnout Two simple, low-resource wellbeing sessions can be delivered by staff for staff without specialist training. The Staff Wellbeing (SWell) project, led by Aston University researchers in collaboration with Birmingham Children’s Hospital and NHS England, has developed two simple, easy-to-deliver sessions to improve the wellbeing of staff in paediatric critical care (PCC) units in UK hospitals. PCC staff are known to experience high levels of moral distress, symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and burnout, but often feel little is offered to help them with their mental health. The SWell team at Aston University, led by Professor Rachel Shaw from the Institute of Health and Neurodevelopment, realised following a literature review that there are no existing, evidence-based interventions specifically designed to improve PCC staff wellbeing. Initial work by SWell identified the ‘active ingredients’ likely to create successful intervention designs. Together with a team from NHS England, the Aston University researchers set up the SWell Collaborative Project: Interventions for Staff Wellbeing in Paediatric Critical Care, in PCC units across England and Scotland. The aim of the project was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing wellbeing interventions for staff working in PCC in UK hospitals. In total, 14 of the 28 UK PCC units were involved. One hundred and four intervention sessions were run, attended by 573 individuals. Professor Shaw said: “The significance of healthcare staff wellbeing was brought to the surface during the COVID-19 pandemic, but it’s a problem that has existed far longer than that. As far as we could see researchers had focused on measuring the extent of the problem rather than coming up with possible solutions. The SWell project was initiated to understand the challenges to wellbeing when working in paediatric critical care, to determine what staff in that high-pressure environment need, and what could actually work day-to-day to make a difference. Seeing PCC staff across half the paediatric critical care units in the UK show such enthusiasm and commitment to make the SWell interventions a success has been one of the proudest experiences in my academic career to date.” The two wellbeing sessions tested are low-resource and low-intensity, and can be delivered by staff for staff without any specialist qualifications. In the session ‘Wellbeing Images’, a small group of staff is shown images representing wellbeing, with a facilitated discussion using appreciative inquiry - a way of structuring discussions to create positive change in a system or situation by focusing on what works well, rather than what is wrong. In the ‘Mad-Sad-Glad’ session, another small group reflective session, participants explore what makes them feel mad, sad and glad, and identify positive actions to resolve any issues raised. The key ingredients in both sessions are social support – providing a psychologically safe space where staff can share their sensitive experiences and emotions without judgement, providing support for each other; self-belief – boosting staff’s self-confidence and ability to identify and express their emotions in response to work; and feedback and monitoring – encouraging staff to monitor what increases their stress, when they experience challenging emotions, and what might help boost their wellbeing in those scenarios. Feedback from staff both running and participating in the SWell interventions was very positive, with high satisfaction and feasibility ratings. Participants like that the session facilitated open and honest discussions, provided opportunities to connect with colleagues and offered opportunities for generating solutions and support. One hospital staff member responsible for delivering the sessions said: “Our staff engaged really well, and it created a buzz around the unit with members of the team asking if they could be ‘swelled' on shift. A really positive experience and we are keeping it as part of our staff wellbeing package.” The team concluded that even on busy PCC units, it is feasible to deliver SWell sessions. In addition, following the sessions, staff wellbeing and depression scores improved, indicating their likely positive impact on staff. Further evaluations are needed to determine whether positive changes can be sustained over time following the SWell sessions. The work was funded by Aston University Proof of Concept Fund and NHS England. Donna Austin, an advanced critical care practitioner at University Hospital Southampton paediatric intensive care unit, said: “We were relatively new to implementing wellbeing initiatives, but we recognised the need for measures to be put in place for an improvement in staff wellbeing, as staff had described burnout, stress and poor mood. SWell has enabled our unit to become more acutely aware of the needs of the workforce and adapt what we deliver to suit the needs of the staff where possible. Staff morale and retention has been the greatest outcomes from us participating in the SWell study and ongoing SWell related interventions.” Read the paper about the SWell interventions in the journal Nursing in Critical Care at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nicc.13228. For more information about SWell, visit the website.
Peer-To-Peer Borrowing Surged During Pandemic, Research Finds
New research by Florida Tech assistant professor of business Alina Malkova, Ph.D explores how small businesses sought financing amid the COVID-19 pandemic’s unstable economic environment. Her paper, “Beyond banks: Navigating the shift to peer-to-peer lending for small enterprises,” published in the journal Research in Economics, developed a model to find whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected small-business owners’ demand for peer-to-peer (P2P) lending. Malkova found that more small business owners turned to P2P platforms during this time, primarily because they were more accessible and flexible than traditional banks. Borrowers could access P2P platforms online for convenient use, and the platforms’ advanced algorithms gave lenders more information about borrowers, such as neighborhood demographics, leading to a better understanding of their financial situation. “If you are an owner or borrower and you have short-term financial problems, it may help you,” Malkova says. “It helps you signal your situation.” Ultimately, Malkova says P2P platforms played critical role in overcoming financial barriers that inhibited small businesses in times of limited access to traditional funding. If you're interested in learning more or a reporter looking to speak with Alina Malkova - simply contact Adam Lowenstein, Director of Media Communications at Florida Institute of Technology at adam@fit.edu to arrange an interview today.
