Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Survey says: Senior leaders are using AI, but they could use more direction

Over the years, study upon study has shown that senior leaders are slower to adapt to new technology – email, the Internet and social media – than younger employees. That’s not necessarily so with AI, according to the University of Delaware’s Saleem Mistry. Mistry, associate professor of management at UD's Alfred Lerner College of Business & Economics, recently conducted a survey of more than 200 university alumni, 75% of which had more than 16 years of professional experience. He found that senior leaders are actively adopting AI to solve their biggest challenges. However, they are doing so largely without structured support or guidance. Here are four findings from Mistry's survey that shows how AI is actually being used at the top. Senior Leaders Are Overwhelmingly Self-Taught Mistry said his most glaring finding is the gap between high AI adoption among senior leaders and the near-total absence of formal corporate support. Although a majority use these tools, they are almost entirely self-taught, which highlights visible opportunity that organizations aren’t really steering the AI conversation for leaders: High usage. 62% of all senior leaders surveyed use AI tools "regularly" or "occasionally" in their work. Training gap. Of those users, an overwhelming 80% report their organization provides "Never" or only "Sometimes" (mostly never) adequate training. Mistry said this shows that leaders from VP level down are using tools like ChatGPT and Copilot informally to keep up with heavy workloads, without any real organizational guidance. The stakes are high. In the survey, a vice president of legal was using AI for compliance tasks and a manager of three was using it for performance reviews, both with no formal training. “These are senior leaders handling sensitive work while essentially figuring it out on their own,” Mistry said. There is a clear ladder of AI use Leaders are not using AI randomly. There is a clear progression in how they use it, moving through three levels. • Tier 1 (The Drafters) This is the most common starting point. Leaders use AI to improve writing and communication. They draft emails, shape documents, and refine tone. As one Director of Product put it, it helps him "polish phrasing" and adjust tone and voice. • Tier 2 (The Synthesizers) At this stage, leaders use AI to manage information overload. They summarize meetings, condense documents, and pull together research so they can keep up with large volumes of input. As one leader managing a team of 200 said, "Being a leader requires attention in a variety of areas. AI helps me manage the vast amounts of information I need to consume." • Tier 3 (The Architects) Here, leaders move beyond writing and summarizing. They use AI to automate parts of their work. This includes building agents, creating custom GPTs, or designing tools that track work and performance. One leader managing 300 people said, "It will eliminate half or more of my overhead." Managers and individual contributors use AI for different reasons People managers and individual contributors (IC) are using AI for very different reasons based on their roles. • For people managers, their main challenge is scale. They are overloaded with communication and administration, so they use AI to reduce noise and keep up. They lean heavily on summarization and tone adjustment tools. • For project leads and ICs, their focus is output. They use AI to produce work faster, including drafting content, building decks, writing code, or generating ideas. This difference reflects their jobs. One group is trying to keep up, the other is trying to produce more. It also shows that AI is not a single-use tool. Its value depends on the problem it is being used to solve. This difference reflects their jobs. One group is trying to keep up, the other is trying to produce more. It also shows that AI is not a single-use tool. Its value depends on the problem it is being used to solve. Resistance to AI is mostly intentional Among the 38 percent of leaders who do not use AI, resistance is usually not based on lack of awareness. It falls into three groups. • The Ethical Objectors. Some avoid AI due to concerns about its broader impact. • The Quality Skeptics. Some do not trust the output and feel it is not reliable enough for important work. • The Blocked. Some are not allowed to use AI due to company policy. Mistry concludes that there is a clear overall pattern: Leaders are using AI in practical ways, but mostly without structured support or guidance. “If it feels like you are figuring this out as you go without much help from your organization, that is consistent with what most leaders are experiencing,” Mistry said. To connect directly with Mistry and arrange an interview, visit his profile page and click on the "connect" button. Interested reporters can also email MediaRelations@udel.edu.

Expert Insights: Want More Engagement? Eliminate the Barriers.

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

The Biggest Study Yet on School Cellphone Bans Shows Results Aren’t So Simple

As more schools move to restrict or completely ban smartphones in classrooms, the largest study ever conducted on school cellphone bans is challenging assumptions about what these policies actually achieve. The new U.S. study, involving roughly 4,600 schools and researchers from institutions including Stanford, Duke, the University of Michigan, and the University of Pennsylvania, found that strict cellphone bans dramatically reduced phone use during the school day. In some schools, classroom phone use dropped from 61 percent to just 13 percent. It's a popular topic and media coverage of the results has been extensive. But the findings became more complicated from there. Researchers found little immediate evidence that phone bans significantly improved test scores, attendance, classroom attention, or bullying rates. Some schools even saw short-term increases in student discipline issues and declines in student well-being immediately after bans were introduced. Still, the study suggested that longer-term outcomes may improve as students adjust and schools refine enforcement strategies. Teachers consistently reported fewer classroom distractions and stronger learning environments. Mizuko Ito is a cultural anthropologist of technology use, focusing on children and youth's changing relationships to media and communications. She recently completed a research project supported by the MacArthur Foundation a three year ethnographic study of kid-initiated and peer-based forms of engagement with new media. View her profile The findings arrive as governments across North America continue expanding school cellphone restrictions amid growing concerns about distraction, screen addiction, anxiety, and the impact of social media on youth mental health. The study highlights a growing debate among educators, parents, and researchers: while limiting phone access may reduce distractions, the relationship between young people, technology, mental health, and learning is far more complex than simply removing devices from classrooms.

From Amateur Passion to Global Science: How Meteorites Tell the Story of Our Solar System

A recent article in Texas Highways traces how Oscar Monnig, a Fort Worth businessman with no formal scientific training, built one of the most significant meteorite collections in the United States. Beginning in the 1930s, Monnig identified and acquired rare space rocks, often working directly with scientists and collectors, ultimately assembling a collection that would later be donated to Texas Christian University. Today, that legacy is carried forward, and elevated, by Rhiannon Mayne, curator of the Oscar E. Monnig Meteorite Collection and Gallery. Mayne frames Monnig not just as a collector, but as a foundational figure in modern meteoritics whose contributions continue to enable global research. As she notes, his collection ensures that “decades from now” scientists worldwide will still be able to study these materials. “He was definitely one of the most important meteorite collectors of the 20th century,” says Rhiannon Mayne, the curator of the Oscar Monnig Meteorite Collection and Gallery at TCU. She adds that, although he was not a scientist, his gift enables ongoing research in meteoritics. “Decades from now, people all over the world will get to request samples to study because of him.”  Expert Insight: Turning a Private Collection into a Global Research Engine Mayne’s role is central to transforming Monnig’s passion project into a living scientific asset. Under her leadership, the collection, now one of the largest university-based meteorite repositories in the world supports both cutting-edge research and public engagement. Her work highlights a key insight: meteorites are not just curiosities, but critical records of planetary formation. By studying them, scientists can access information about the early solar system, and even Earth’s own origins that is otherwise impossible to obtain. Rhiannon Mayne is the curator of the Oscar E. Monnig Meteorite Collection, one of the world’s largest university-based meteorite collections, which also includes a world-class museum. View her profile The article ultimately becomes a story about continuity—how individual curiosity evolves into institutional impact. Monnig’s amateur pursuit laid the groundwork, but it is experts like Mayne who translate that legacy into ongoing discovery, education and global collaboration. In that sense, Mayne embodies the bridge between past and future: preserving a historic collection while ensuring it remains scientifically relevant, accessible and inspiring for the next generation of researchers.

TCU Chemistry Researcher Named a Big 12 Faculty of the Year

Kayla Green has built an internationally recognized research program while mentoring the next generation of scientists at Texas Christian University, and her efforts are getting noticed. The chemistry professor and assistant dean of undergraduate affairs at the Louise Dilworth Davis College of Science & Engineering represents TCU among this year’s Big 12 Faculty of the Year honorees. The Big 12 Faculty of the Year Award honors outstanding faculty who excel in innovation and research at each of the athletic conference’s 16 universities. Honorees represent and reflect the best attributes that make a Big 12 college campus a bastion for learning and growth. “In my view, Professor Green exemplifies the fact that student success cannot happen without research, and world-leading research cannot happen without authentic, student-centered experiences,” wrote a nominator when Green was named the 2025 winner of the Chancellor’s Award for Distinguished Achievement as a Creative Teacher and Scholar. “Professor Green has maintained a vibrant, externally funded research program throughout the past 15 years, a distinction shared by very few TCU faculty.”  Green was chosen in part for her international reputation in the field of inorganic chemistry as applied to neurodegenerative diseases and catalysis, as well as her leadership in a growing research program that has brought in more than $2.5 million in external support. This includes work with Ben Janesko, professor and chair of chemistry and biochemistry, and biology professors Giri Akkaraju and Michael Chumley on a grant from the National Institutes of Health. Green’s collaborative work with students highlights her ability to weave together research and mentorship. “Dr. Green’s vision and drive have strengthened the foundation of our college,” said T. Dwayne McCay, interim dean of Davis College. “Her ability to inspire students and colleagues alike reflects the kind of leadership that propels our mission forward.”  One of her most impactful initiatives is Chemistry Boot Camp, a program she developed with colleagues Janesko and Heidi Conrad to help incoming students build confidence before their first chemistry class.  The Big 12 Faculty of the Year Award is intended to showcase the diversity of research breakthroughs and educational opportunities afforded to students attending Big 12 institutions and helps attract future students. This year’s award recipients stretch across a vast array of departments. “We are constantly looking for ways to highlight how Big 12 faculty continue to educate and inspire the next generation of leaders,” Jenn Hunter, Big 12 chief impact officer said. “From the arts and filmmaking to business and engineering, this year’s cohort showcases the vast opportunities available to students pursuing an education on Big 12 campuses.” Faculty members were nominated by their institutions in conjunction with conference faculty athletic representatives, provosts and other university leaders. “I’m very honored to represent TCU as a Big 12 Faculty of the Year,” Green said. “I hope that I am not expected to exhibit any athletic skill sets but am happy to cheer on the Frogs in all they do in our classrooms and competitions! Congratulations to the honorees from across our great conference. TCU has the best faculty, and I am happy to represent them in this capacity.”

Seeing Green: Chemistry Professor Transforming Undergraduate Research at TCU

When it comes to advancing both student success and world-class research, Kayla Green embodies how the two can go hand in hand. The chemistry professor and assistant dean of undergraduate affairs at the Louise Dilworth Davis College of Science & Engineering has built an internationally recognized research program while mentoring the next generation of scientists and reshaping how chemistry is taught at Texas Christian University. Her leadership weaves together research and mentorship in ways that have elevated the department’s impact. With more than $2.5 million in external funding and a track record of collaboration around the globe, Green’s work has not only advanced the field of inorganic chemistry, particularly as applied to neurodegenerative diseases and catalysis, but also strengthened TCU’s standing as a hub for undergraduate research excellence. “In the summer heading into my junior year, I began working on what would be my research project in Dr. Green’s lab … that would use iron as a catalyst in molecules. I would end up presenting that research in my senior year,” said Jack Bonnell ’24, a John V. Roach Honors College laureate. Iron is more affordable, more available and less societally problematic than preexisting palladium- or platinum-based molecules. “By the end of my senior year, I was able to achieve comparable results with my iron catalyst as you could achieve with palladium or platinum,” said Bonnell, now a second-year medical student at the Anne Burnett Marion School of Medicine at TCU. “That was a pretty cool moment in my research, to be able to put it up there in comparison to those.” Since joining TCU in 2010, Green has mentored more than 50 undergraduate students in her lab, many of whom have gone on to publish their work, present at national conferences and pursue medical or doctoral degrees. She has also been instrumental in creating programs that prepare students to succeed in challenging classes and stay the course in scientific disciplines. “Dr. Green’s vision and drive have strengthened the foundation of our college,” said T. Dwayne McCay, interim dean of the Davis College of Science & Engineering. “Her ability to inspire students and colleagues alike reflects the kind of leadership that propels our mission forward.” Lifting Them Up One of Green’s most impactful initiatives is Chemistry Boot Camp, a program she developed with colleagues Ben Janesko and Heidi Conrad to help incoming students build confidence before their first chemistry class. “The boot camp helps lift them up, and it’s really helped with retention of students in pre-health and science fields,” said Timothy Barth, psychology professor and associate dean of graduate affairs in Davis College. “She didn’t have to do this; she created it because of her commitment and dedication to the students.” Green’s innovative use of grant funding has expanded laboratory resources, supported student travel to conferences and strengthened research collaborations. The result is a department that rivals larger institutions in both output and opportunity. “Davis College does a fantastic job on undergraduate research training,” Green said. “We are a powerhouse.” For Green, teaching and research are inseparable. Her classroom and laboratory experiences are deliberately interconnected, allowing students to see how chemistry concepts play out in the real world. “Going into a lot of these complicated diagnoses and being able to break them down into digestible pieces of information for patients is a skill that I definitely can see as useful in my future as a physician,” Bonnell said. As much as the material itself, he credits Green’s mentorship and the opportunities she provided for his preparation for medical school. “I had only taken Dr. Green’s general chemistry course in my first semester as a freshman at TCU. I joined her lab in the spring semester of my freshman year, and I knew only the bare minimum about chemistry. I was in meetings with graduate students who had been working on projects for years,” Bonnell said. “At the beginning, she bounced me around, and I worked with different graduate students to learn all the different things they were doing to find my best fit.” That blend of rigor and encouragement has become a hallmark of her approach and a model for other departments seeking to integrate research more deeply into the undergraduate experience. Building on Success Green’s excellence has earned her wide recognition, including honors from the American Chemical Society (Emerging Investigator and Women Chemists Rising Star awards), TCU’s Deans’ Award for Research and Creative Activity and, most recently, the Chancellor’s Award for Distinguished Achievement as a Creative Teacher and Scholar. She now brings that same analytical insight and collaborative spirit to her position as the college’s assistant dean of undergraduate affairs, a role she began this academic year. “We’ve already begun to experience her decision-making and analysis as part of the dean’s team,” Barth said. “In a short period of time, she’s proving to be an amazing and remarkable administrator.” Looking ahead, Green continues to build on her success through a National Institutes of Health R15 AREA grant, which supports undergraduate research and provides students with opportunities to contribute to federally funded science. “TCU Chemistry has an incredible record of placing students in medical school, Ph.D. programs and research labs across the country,” Green said. “It’s rewarding to see our students thrive in environments that started with their hands-on experiences here.”

How the Class of 2026 can keep resumes out of the digital black hole

Students set to graduate this May are entering a job market where the rules of engagement are being rewritten in real-time. AI is both friend and foe, and ghosting has become the norm. University of Delaware career expert Jill Panté shares how college students can navigate these challenges in a rapidly shifting economy. Panté, director of the Lerner Career Services Center at UD, can apply her expertise to the following: The AI recruitment gap • How to prevent resumes from falling into the "digital black hole" of automated tracking systems. • Current recruitment in 2026 is heavily filtered by AI. If resumes don't mirror the language of the job description, a human might never even see it. • In 2026, AI is the gatekeeper. Students who aren’t using AI for assistance are working twice as hard for half the results. However, the goal is to use it as a co-pilot, not an autopilot. Beat the bots (tailor your content) • Use tools like Resume Worded or Generative AI like Microsoft Co-Pilot or Gemini to see how resumes stack up against specific job postings. • It is better to send five highly tailored, thoughtful applications than 50 generic ones that get auto-rejected by an algorithm. • Use AI to run a mock interview based on the job description and company. The "hidden” job market • If a "job search" consists solely of clicking "Easy Apply" on LinkedIn for six hours a day, it’s not searching; it’s just doom-scrolling with a resume. Roughly 80% of your time should be spent talking to humans. The other 20% should be spent on applications and research. • Find the recruiter or a department head on LinkedIn. Send a brief (2-3 sentence) note reiterating your interest. • Leverage alumni networks through LinkedIn. Narrative branding • Especially for Gen Z: Hiring managers don't just want to know what you did; they want to know the impact you made. • Instead of saying "Responsible for social media,” say "Increased engagement by 40% over 3 months by implementing a new video strategy." • Always lead with results (LinkedIn, resume, Interviews) to showcase the value you bring. Workforce anxiety • Managing the mental toll of the modern, high-speed job search and the professional "ghosting" epidemic. • Establish a personal "Board of Directors" to provide a balance of support, accountability and feedback. • Maintain momentum by volunteering, attending local networking events and learning new skills on platforms like LinkedIn Learning and Coursera. To reach Jill Panté directly and arrange an interview, visit her profile and click on the “contact” button.

“With Global Antisemitism Rising, ‘Never Again’ Rings Hollow”

Hofstra Professor of Political Science and Director of the European Studies Program Carolyn Dudek wrote a guest essay for Newsday: “With global antisemitism rising, ‘Never Again’ rings hollow.” Dr. Dudek was awarded the 2024 Jean Monnet Chair to expand research, teaching, and course development on the European Union, with a specific focus on EU anti-discrimination policies that address marginalized groups, such as Jews, Muslims, Roma, women, communities of color and the LGBTQ+ community.

University of Delaware biomedical engineer helps develop first immune-capable cervix-on-a-chip

A major breakthrough in biomedical engineering is changing how scientists study sexually transmitted infections (STIs) – and a researcher from the University of Delaware is at the forefront. Published in Science Advances, the study introduces the first immune-capable “cervix-on-a-chip,” a cutting-edge microphysiological system that replicates the human cervical environment. The platform allows researchers to observe how infections, the immune system and the vaginal microbiome interact in real time – something not previously possible with traditional lab models. Co-lead author Jason Gleghorn, associate professor in the College of Engineering, led the development of the model. His work highlights how engineering-driven approaches are advancing critical research in women’s health. By integrating engineering with biology, we can now simulate complex human systems more accurately and make these tools accessible to a wider range of researchers, Gleghorn said. The model recreates key features of the cervix using human cells, immune components and naturally occurring microbiomes within a dynamic system that mimics physiological conditions. When tested with infections such as chlamydia and gonorrhea, the platform revealed how protective bacteria can reduce infection risk – while imbalanced microbiomes can worsen outcomes. These findings could help accelerate the development of new therapies, including probiotics and other preventative strategies aimed at strengthening the body’s natural defenses. The research underscores the growing impact of the College of Engineering, where interdisciplinary collaboration is driving innovation across biomedical engineering and beyond. By combining expertise in engineering, microbiology and immunology, the team has created a powerful new tool that could reshape how STIs – and other complex diseases – are studied. To speak with Gleghorn further about this advancement, email mediarelations@udel.edu.

Study finds most cancer patients exposed to misinformation; UF researchers pilot 'information prescription'

Ninety-three percent of patients with a new cancer diagnosis were exposed to at least one type of misinformation about cancer treatments, a UF Health Cancer Center study has found. Most patients encountered the misinformation — defined as unproven or disproven cancer treatments and myths or misconceptions — even when they weren’t looking for it. The findings have major implications for cancer treatment decision-making. Specifically, doctors should assume the patient has seen or heard misinformation. “Clinicians should assume when their patients are coming to them for a treatment discussion that they have been exposed to different types of information about cancer treatment, whether or not they went online and looked it up themselves,” said senior author Carma Bylund, Ph.D., a professor and associate chair of education in the UF Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics. “One way or another, people are being exposed to a lot of misinformation.” Working with oncologists, Bylund and study first author Naomi Parker, Ph.D., an assistant scientist in the UF Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, are piloting an “information prescription” to steer patients to sources of evidence-based information like the American Cancer Society. The study paves the way for other similar strategies. Most notably, the study found the most common way patients were exposed to misinformation was second hand. “Your algorithms pick up on your diagnosis, your friends and family pick up on it, and then you’re on Facebook and you become exposed to this media,” Parker said. “You’re not necessarily seeking out if vitamin C may be a cure for cancer, but you start being fed that content.” And no, vitamin C does not cure cancer. Health misinformation can prevent people from getting treatment that has evidence behind it, negatively affect relationships between patients and physicians, and increase the risk of death, research has shown. People with cancer are particularly vulnerable to misinformation because of the anxiety and fear that comes with a serious diagnosis, not to mention the overwhelming amount of new information they have to suddenly absorb. While past research has studied misinformation by going directly to the source — for instance, studying what percentage of content on a platform like TikTok is nonsense — little research has looked at its prevalence or how it affects people. The team first developed a way to identify the percentage of cancer patients exposed to misinformation. UF researchers collaborated with Skyler Johnson, M.D., at Huntsman Cancer Institute, an internationally known researcher in the field. The survey questions were based on five categories of unproven or disproven cancer treatments — vitamins and minerals, herbs and supplements, special diets, mind-body interventions and miscellaneous treatments — and treatment misconceptions. The myths and misconceptions were adapted from National Cancer Institute materials and included statements like “Will eating sugar make my cancer worse?” The team surveyed 110 UF Health patients diagnosed with prostate, breast, colorectal or lung cancer within the past six months, a time when patients typically make initial treatment decisions. Most had heard of a potential cancer treatment beyond the standard of care, and most reported they had heard of at least one myth or misconception. The most common sources were close friends or family and websites, distant friends/associates or relatives, social media and news media. The findings mark a shift in misinformation research, with major implications for the doctor-patient relationship, said Bylund, a member of the Cancer Control and Population Sciences research program at the UF Health Cancer Center. “I still think media and the internet are the source and why misinformation can spread so rapidly, but it might come to a cancer patient interpersonally, from family or friends,” she said. Most patients rarely discussed the potential cancer treatments they had heard about with an oncologist, the study also found. Next, the researchers plan to survey a wider pool of patients, then study the outcomes of interventions designed to decrease misinformation exposure, like the information prescription.