Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Taking the Reins of Holiday Stress
Ho-ho-ho and a bottle of Tums? From feeding a crowd to juggling travel and schedules and managing finances during a challenging economic time, the holidays can feel like a pressure cooker. But University of Rochester psychologist Jeremy Jamieson, one of the country’s leading researchers on stress, says the pressures of the season of giving (and giving and giving and giving some more) can be mitigated by mentally reframing the stress we feel. In other words, what matters is how we interpret our stress. Jamieson’s Social Stress Lab studies a technique called "stress reappraisal": the practice of reframing stress responses as helpful rather than harmful. According to researchers, people can learn to treat their signs of stress — the racing heart, the sweaty palms, the mental sense of urgency — as tools that prepare them to meet a challenge rather than a sign that they’re falling apart. “Stress reappraisal isn’t about calming down or shutting stress off,” Jamieson says. “It’s about changing the meaning of your stress response. If you view the demands as something you can handle, your body shifts into a challenge state, which is a more adaptive, productive kind of stress.” The research behind this approach has grown considerably. In one of Jamieson’s studies, published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, the Social Stress Lab trained community college students to reinterpret stress as a resource. The results were striking: students experienced less anxiety, performed better on exams, procrastinated less, were more likely to stay enrolled, and approached academic challenges with healthier physiological responses. Newer findings from the lab also suggest that stress reframing can support people facing workplace pressures, caregiving responsibilities, and major life transitions. In short, stress isn’t the enemy of our well-being during the holidays. The real culprit is believing stress is dangerous. Jamieson is available for interviews and can explain how people can use stress reappraisal strategies to navigate holiday pressures — and other high-demand moments — with more confidence, better health, and better outcomes. Click on his profile to connect with him.
New AI model predicts harmful videos before they go viral
Certain short-form videos on major social media platforms can trigger suicidal thoughts among vulnerable viewers, according to new research led by the University of Delaware's Jiaheng Xie. His team developed an AI model that can predict and flag these videos. In the study, published Nov. 17 in Information Systems Research, UD professor Jiaheng Xie and his co-authors showed how AI can assist with safety by predicting high-risk videos before they go viral by looking through both the content and what people write in the comments. • Distinguish what creators choose to post from what viewers think or feel after watching. • Separate known medical risk factors from emerging social media trends, such as viral heartbreak clips or challenges that may influence teens. • This system is especially novel because it predicts the high-risk videos before they reach large audiences. Xie is available for a Zoom interview to share how the model was developed and how it could potentially change the way platforms such as TikTok moderate.
New findings from a recent survey conducted by CAA Manitoba (CAA MB) highlight a concerning trend: substance use, particularly cannabis, is on the rise both recreationally and behind the wheel. “Cannabis is more accessible than ever, and that means more Manitobans are not only choosing to drive after consuming it but are also getting behind the wheel soon after and expressing increased confidence in their ability to do so,” says Ewald Friesen, manager, government & community relations for CAA Manitoba. The data shows that 24 per cent of drivers admitted to consuming cannabis before driving, which is up six per cent from last year, while ten per cent of Manitobans reported driving after consuming cannabis in the past few months, a three per cent increase from 2024. Among cannabis-impaired drivers, most (63 per cent) say they drove within three hours of consumption, which is up 10 per cent from last year. Over a third of cannabis-impaired drivers acknowledged feeling high while driving. In addition to the survey conducted by CAA MB, a recent study with funding support from CAA, conducted by the University of Saskatchewan, examined 50 drivers aged 19 to 30 to assess how consuming edible cannabis influences collision risk. This age group of young drivers, identified as having the highest crash rates and a greater tendency toward risky driving behaviour, offers new insights into the impact of cannabis on driving. Drivers often have a false sense of confidence when driving high. This study examined how consuming edible cannabis affects collision risk. Findings indicate that critical driving skills, including reaction time, lane discipline, and speed control, were impaired even shortly after consumption. Contrary to popular belief that cannabis edibles take hours to take effect, this study shows that impairment is evident 90 minutes after consumption. When asked if they felt safe to drive after consuming edibles, only four per cent felt safe getting behind the wheel 90 minutes after eating an edible cannabis product. What is interesting about this is that in a controlled environment, young drivers feel unsafe driving under the influence of cannabis. However, the study conducted by CAA MB shows that drivers often have a false sense of confidence when they have driven high in the past. “This study marks an important first step in understanding how cannabis edibles impact driving performance,” adds says Friesen. “Too often, decisions about whether someone is fit to drive are made in the moment, relying on judgment rather than evidence. Cannabis impairment studies like this are essential. Each one brings new learnings that help us refine our approach and ensure that safety is never left to chance.” According to CAA Manitoba’s data, more drivers have reported feeling confident in their driving ability (77 per cent), which is up ten per cent from 2024. More drivers this year (33 per cent) also say that they are unsure about how much cannabis is needed for effects to kick in, up six per cent from 2024. Alarmingly enough, more than half of Manitobans are unaware that the penalties associated with driving under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or a combination of substances are the same. “Drivers may face enhanced roadside sanctions, including an administrative penalty of $700, vehicle impoundment, mandatory Ignition Interlock participation for one year, an impaired driver assessment and movement of 10 levels down the Driver Safety Rating scale,” says Friesen. “Depending on the severity of convictions, impaired drivers may be charged further under the Criminal Code of Canada.” This holiday season, CAA Manitoba is asking that those who do consume cannabis, alcohol or other drugs to plan ahead by making alternate arrangements, such as a designated driver or using a rideshare service, to get home safely. Methodology CAA MB The online survey was conducted by DIG Insights from June 27 to July 14, 2025, with 514 Manitoba drivers aged 19 and older. Based on the sample size of n=514 and with a confidence level of 95 per cent, the margin of error for this research is +/- 3%.) Methodology of University of Saskatchewan study The study collected extensive data from 50 young adult drivers (aged 19–30), resulting in 250 assessments across multiple realistic driving scenarios using a simulator after consuming a 10mg THC edible.
MEDIA RELEASE: New CAA Study Sheds Light on Edible Cannabis and Collision Risk Among Young Drivers
A recent study with funding support from CAA, conducted by the University of Saskatchewan, examined 50 drivers aged 19 to 30 to assess how consuming edible cannabis influences collision risk among young drivers. This demographic, which is known for having a higher tendency to engage in risky driving behaviour, currently holds the highest crash rates nationwide. “This study marks an important first step in understanding how cannabis edibles impact driving performance,” says Michael Stewart, Community Relations Consultant for CAA South Central Ontario. “Too often, decisions about whether someone is fit to drive are made in the moment, relying on judgment rather than evidence. Cannabis impairment studies like this are essential. Each one brings new learnings that help us refine our approach and ensure that safety is never left to chance.” The findings indicate that critical driving skills, including reaction time, lane discipline, and speed control, were impaired. Consumption times may vary to feel the effects of edible cannabis from driver to driver. However, the study found that impairment was most evident at 90 minutes after consumption, so its effects may not be noticeable until a motorist is already behind the wheel. When asked if they felt safe to drive after consuming edibles, only four per cent felt safe getting behind the wheel 90 minutes after eating an edible cannabis product. What is interesting about this is that in a controlled environment, young drivers feel unsafe driving under the influence of cannabis. However, a recent survey of 1,510 Ontario drivers from CAA SCO shows that drivers often have a false sense of confidence when they have driven high in the past. The perception of safety doesn’t match reality The survey found that the number of people admitting to cannabis-impaired driving in Ontario (nearly 20 per cent) has remained stable compared to last year. However, a concerning trend has emerged, with more cannabis-impaired drivers (78 per cent) saying they are confident in their driving abilities while under the influence – a 13 per cent overall increase from 2021. Why is this concerning? The perception of safety doesn’t match reality. More than a third of cannabis-impaired drivers acknowledged feeling high while driving, relying on their personal judgment for signs of impairment, such as drowsiness, slowed reaction time, or brain fog. “This misplaced confidence can lead to dangerous decisions, increasing the risk of collisions and endangering road users,” adds Stewart. “We must recognize that getting behind the wheel is not just a personal choice it’s a responsibility that affects the safety of everyone on our roads.” Growing issue of poly-use The research also points to a growing issue of poly-use, or the consumption of multiple substances and is on the rise. This trend adds another layer of complexity to road safety efforts, as the combined effects of different substances can further impair judgment and reaction times. Most respondents (57 per cent) say they consume cannabis in combination with other substances – most commonly, alcohol. However, painkillers, psilocybin, ecstasy, and MDMA are on the rise. CAA SCO continues to advocate for safer roads by encouraging motorists to make responsible choices. The message is clear: do not get behind the wheel when impaired. “While we’re all aware that alcohol-impaired driving can be dangerous, we should also take the same attitude towards cannabis-impaired driving,” says Stewart. “With the holiday season coming up, cannabis can be consumed legally and responsibly but should never be used when driving.” CAA is asking that those who do consume cannabis, alcohol or other drugs to plan ahead by making alternate arrangements, such as a designated driver or using a rideshare service, to get home safely this holiday season. Methodology The online survey was conducted by DIG Insights from June 27 to July 14, 2025, with 1,510 Ontario drivers aged 19 and older. Based on the sample size of n=1,510 and with a confidence level of 95 per cent, the margin of error for this research is +/- 2%.) Methodology of the University of Saskatchewan study The study collected extensive data from 50 young adult drivers (aged 19–30), resulting in 250 assessments across multiple realistic driving scenarios using a simulator after consuming a 10mg THC edible.
The Conversation: A UF neuroscientist explains the science of pain
Nobody likes to feel pain, but it’s something every person will experience at some point in their life. But why is that? I am a neuroscientist, and my job is to research why and how people feel pain in order to help doctors understand how to treat it better. What is pain? To understand why people feel pain, it helps first to understand what pain is. Pain is the unpleasant sensation you feel when your body is experiencing harm, or thinks it is. Not everyone experiences pain the same way. Pain is a highly personal experience influenced by a variety of biological, psychological and social factors. For example, research has shown differences in the pain experiences of women and men, young and older people, and even across people from different cultures. Danger signals A network of nerves similar to wires runs all through the human body, from the tips of your fingers and toes, through your back inside the spinal cord and up to your brain. Specialized pain receptors called nociceptors can be found at the end of the nerves on your skin, muscles, joints and internal organs. Each nociceptor is designed to activate its nerve if it detects a danger signal. One way scientists classify nociceptors is based on the type of danger signal that activates them. Mechanical nociceptors respond to physical damage, such as cuts or pressure, while thermal nociceptors react to extreme temperatures. Chemical nociceptors are triggered by chemicals that the body’s own tissues release when they are damaged. These receptors may also be triggered by external irritants, such as the chemical capsaicin, which gives chili peppers their heat. This is why eating spicy food can cause you pain. Finally, there are the nociceptors that are activated by a combination of various triggers. For example, one of these receptors in your skin could be activated by the poke of a sharp object, the cold of an ice pack, the heat from a mug of cocoa, a chemical burn from household bleach, or a combination of all three kinds of stimulation. How pain travels though the body When you fall and get a scrape, the mechanical nociceptors in your skin spring into action. As soon as you hit the ground, they activate an electrical signal that travels through the nearby nerves to the spinal cord and up to your brain. Your brain interprets these signals to locate the place in your body that is hurting and determine how intense the pain is. Your brain knows that a pain signal is an SOS message from your body that something isn’t right. So it activates multiple systems all at once to get you out of danger and help you survive. Your brain may call on other parts of your nervous system to release chemicals called endorphins that will reduce your pain. It may tell your endocrine system to release hormones that prepare your body to handle the stress of your fall by increasing your heart rate, for example. And it may order your immune system to send special immune cells to the site of your scrape to help manage swelling and heal your skin. As all of this is happening, your brain takes in information about where you are in the world so that you can respond accordingly. Do you need to move away from something hurting you? Did you fall in the middle of the road and now need to get out of the way of moving cars? Not only is your brain working to keep you safe in the moments after your fall, it also is looking ahead to how it can prevent this scenario from happening again. The pain signals from your fall activate parts of your brain called the hippocampus and anterior cingulate cortex that process memory and emotions. They will help you remember how bad falling made you feel so that you will learn how to avoid it in the future. But why do we need to feel pain? As this example shows, pain is like a warning signal from your body. It helps protect you by telling you when something is wrong so that you can stop doing it and avoid getting hurt more. In fact, it’s a problem if you can’t feel pain. Some people have a genetic mutation that changes the way their nociceptors function and do not feel pain at all. This can be very dangerous, because they won’t know when they’re hurt. Ultimately, feeling that scrape and the pain sensation from it helps keep you safe from harm. Yenisel Cruz-Almeida is a UF Associate Professor of Community Dentistry and Associate Director of the Pain Research & Intervention Center Of Excellence, University of Florida This article is republished from The Conversation's Curious Kids series under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article:
Georgia Southern faculty featured on prestigious top 2% of scientists list
Twelve outstanding active faculty members from Georgia Southern University were featured on Stanford and Elsevier’s 2025 list of the top 2% of scientists in the world. This annual list features scientists whose work has had the highest citation count and citation impact in their fields within a given year. This year’s Georgia Southern honorees represent a diverse range of disciplines, from physics and chemistry to epidemiology and business. Ten of the 12 faculty members were also featured on last year’s list. Vice President for Research and Economic Development David Weindorf, Ph.D, P.G., is among them and takes pride in seeing so many familiar names, and a couple of new ones, included. “Seeing names from so many different disciplines, both old and new, speaks volumes about our growth and consistency,” said Weindorf. “I’m so thankful for these faculty who relentlessly pursue excellence and truly embody growing ourselves to grow others in research.” Check out who made the list from Georgia Southern by clicking on the attached media release below: Looking to know more about Georgia Southern University and it's nationally recognized faculty — simply contact Georgia Southern's Director of Communications Jennifer Wise at jwise@georgiasouthern.edu to arrange an interview today.
A popular on-the-go sandwich is now the subject of a mega trademark lawsuit between two food industry giants. The J.M. Smucker Company, more commonly known as Smucker's, recently filed a trademark lawsuit against grocery chain Trader Joe's over what it alleges is infringement upon its iconic billion-dollar investment: the Uncrustables sandwich. Smucker's seeks to obtain unspecified monetary damages from Trader Joe's, as well as profit from its similar product. But beyond the novelty of the sandwich suit lies a complex case built around a lesser-known morsel of trademark law, says Waseem Moorad, Esq., assistant professor of Law at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law and director of the school's Intellectual Property Clinic. Professor Moorad, a former U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent (USPTO) examiner, recently discussed the actual claims of the lawsuit, and how both parties are preparing for a potential trial. Q: Since this lawsuit was filed, it has been a popular topic of public discourse, much of which has centered on the product—a crustless peanut butter and jelly sandwich—itself. Is that what this is truly about? Professor Moorad: Much of the commentary has been focused on the argument of whether Smucker's is permitted to have a monopoly of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, or if Trader Joe's can actually infringe upon the Uncrustables product without necessarily using the actual trademarked name. While both discussions are legitimate conversations folks could have while munching on the delicious snack products, they are not necessarily the relevant legal claims at the crux of this lawsuit. Q: Before we get into what those relevant legal claims are, Smucker's has filed dozens of trademarks in its 128-year history. What sorts of intellectual property do these trademarks generally protect? PM: Most of their trademarks filed with the USPTO are registered to protect against competitors from using words, logos, slogans, symbols and other materials that are linked to the brand name of the company, its affiliates, or its respective products. Well-known examples include Smucker's, Folgers, Jif and, of course, Uncrustables. If a competing company has a brand or a product that has a similar sounding name or appearance, such as "Giff Peanut Butter," then Smucker's could sue that company for trademark infringement. That name is not only infringing upon a trademark that Smucker's has federal protection over, but also is in the same related industry (food products), within which Smucker's has protection. Q: But Trader Joe's did not necessarily infringe on any trademarked words, symbols, slogans or the like. What, then, is the basis for the claims of infringement? PM: The issue is related to a deeper subset of trademark law, specifically the concept of "trade dress." Trade dress is the intellectual property associated with the visual and aesthetic characteristics of a product or its related packaging that allows a consumer to know with whom that product or packaging is associated. For example, Coca-Cola's name, which is federally protected, is well known as a registered trademark; however, the Coca-Cola bottle, with the curvy appearance where it gets slimmer in the middle, is an example of a registered trade dress belonging to Coca-Cola. If there was no logo or word mark on the bottle, the average consumer would still be able to recognize it as a Coke bottle. There are several trademarks that Smucker's owns that are related to the trade dress of its products. Smucker's isn't alleging that Trader Joe's is copying any of the branding names of their products; they are accusing their competitor of mimicking the trade dress or aesthetic appearances, textures and characteristics of its Uncrustables products and packaging. Q: What specific trade dress trademarks are they claiming have been infringed upon? PM: There are at least two registered trademarks that Smucker's is drawing legal attention to. In 2002, Smucker's had trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich that has pie-crimping indentations or marks along the circumference of the sandwich, and in 2019, the company trademarked the image of an Uncrustables sandwich with a bite taken out of it. Smucker's argument is that the Trader Joe's packaging for a similar crustless peanut butter and jelly shows an image of a sandwich with a bite taken out of it, as well as the crimping along the outer edges. Q: How does one make a legal case out of something like this? PM: In order to effectively file a trademark infringement lawsuit, the plaintiff must not only show that their federally-protected intellectual property rights are being infringed upon, but also demonstrate that as a result of this infringement, the customer or consumer is being confused. Smucker's alleges that as result of Trader Joe's actions, customers are now confused over the product and are purchasing Trader Joe's peanut butter and jelly sandwiches thinking they are actually Smucker's Uncrustables sandwiches. Smucker's is of the belief that if the Trader Joe's packaging did not show pie-like crimped edges and the image of the sandwich with a bite taken out of it, confused consumers would not have purchased the Trader Joe's products and would have instead purchased Smucker's Uncrustables. It is this argument that will be the crux of the court cases to follow. Q: Assuming this goes to trial, how will the two parties prepare and what are some of the challenges for Smucker's as plaintiff? PM: Part of the case on Smucker's end will be to gather customer feedback or testimony that demonstrates confusion in the marketplace as a result of the similar packaging and trade dress. Trader Joe's will focus on the fact that even though the packaging may be similar, there would be no reason or basis for a customer to be confused between a Trader Joe's-branded product and a Smucker's-branded product. As the plaintiff in this case, the burden shall be on Smucker's to prove the confusion element necessary to have trademark infringement. The Trader Joe's product clearly says Trader Joe's, and the chain has a marketplace reputation for selling its own products rather than other-branded products. The challenge in such a scenario will be to prove, despite this, that customers purchasing this product would still have gotten confused and either assumed that they were purchasing Uncrustables, or mistakenly believed that Uncrustables may now have a commercial relationship with Trader Joe's.
A new national Unity Poll from Vanderbilt University shows overwhelming agreement among Americans on one core belief: colleges should teach students how to think, not what to think. At a time when higher education is under intense political and cultural scrutiny, this finding reveals an unexpected area of unity. Amid debates over free speech, curriculum design, and the purpose of a degree, Americans are signaling a shared expectation for colleges to cultivate critical thinking and reasoning — not ideological conformity. For journalists, observers or anyone keeping a close eye on post-secondary education, this is a rare lens into what the public actually wants from higher education, and a timely point of entry into stories about academic freedom, the value of a college degree, political polarization, and workforce readiness. “Many observers think current debates about the nature of higher education are relatively new but they are not,” said John Geer, co-director of the Vanderbilt Unity Poll and professor of political science. “The country, for example, was debating the purpose, value and direction of higher education in the 1940s when the federal government made major investments in research and teaching during and after World War II.” “People want colleges and professors to teach students how to think, not what to think,” added Vanderbilt Poll Co-Director Josh Clinton, who holds the Abby and Jon Winkelried Chair at Vanderbilt and is a professor of political science. “The public most highly values those parts of higher education that help students think critically, process information and contribute meaningfully to society. The closer you get to subjects and content that has associations with contemporary political divisions, the more you see public support fracture.” John Geer and Josh Clinton, Co-Directors of the Vanderbilt Unity Poll and Professors of Political Science, are among the nation’s leading experts on public opinion, political behavior and democratic attitudes. With decades of research experience and multiple national polls under their leadership, Geer and Clinton bring essential context to these findings. Their perspective helps media interpret not only the data itself, but the broader social forces shaping how Americans view higher education, institutional trust and the role of colleges in preparing the next generation. What the Data Reveals: 1. A Return to Fundamentals: The Public Wants Critical Thinking Above All Ninety percent of Americans say “the ability to think more logically” is extremely or very important for their children to gain from college. Factual knowledge matters too, but the public places higher value on reasoning, analysis and cognitive skill-building. Geer can help illuminate why this shift is resonating so strongly now — and what it suggests about the changing expectations placed on colleges and universities. 2. A Rare Point of Consensus in a Polarized Era The emphasis on teaching students how to think cuts across political, geographic and demographic lines. Geer notes that agreement of this magnitude is increasingly uncommon in today’s contentious climate. This story angle gives journalists a data-driven counterpoint to the typical “campus culture wars” narrative — showing where unity still exists and why. 3. Is College Worth It? Depends How You Ask When asked about long-term value, a majority of Americans say a college degree is worth the time because it opens better job prospects. But when the question focuses on financial cost, support drops significantly. Geer and Clinton can walk reporters through why perceptions differ depending on how “value” is framed — and how these attitudes influence choices about pursuing postsecondary education. 4. Americans Oppose Government Control of College Teaching Most respondents say the federal government should not direct how professors teach. This adds nuance to ongoing debates about curriculum oversight, classroom autonomy and political influence in higher education. Geer and Clinton’s expertise help explain how this preference aligns with longstanding public attitudes about institutional independence. 5. Curriculum Flashpoints Reveal Sharp Divides While many Americans agree on the need for core historical and civic content, support fragments around politically charged topics. Issues such as gender identity, sexual orientation, and certain cultural topics show much lower consensus. Read the full article and report here:
Life-changing study abroad experiences help students find themselves, UF research shows
Studying abroad is about more than just enrichment for college students; it’s often about personal transformation, UF researchers have found. Every year, UF sends nearly 2,600 students overseas to become immersed in diverse cultures, gain international perspectives, and create social bonds with fellow Gators – experiences so profound that UF researchers recently published a study about their long-term impact in Leisure Sciences. And this week, the UF International Center is hosting a Study Abroad Fair from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 29 on the Reitz North Lawn to generate even more interest in these life-changing programs. “You’ve got to look at travel as not a frivolous thing because it’s part of your life story,” said Heather Gibson, Ph.D., a professor in the UF College of Health & Human Performance’s Department of Tourism, Hospitality & Event Management, who co-authored the study. “The impact isn’t just for the semester when they return; it’s now shown to be over 20 years or more. Very few studies focus on this formative phase of adult development, and these emerging adults are very malleable to be shaped. They’re searching for different sources of identity and different directions.” Conducting this research with Gibson was Hongping (HP) Zhang, Ph.D., a UF graduate of 2020 and clinical assistant professor at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville’s Department of Retail, Hospitality, and Tourism Management. Zhang said that, in 2019, tourism literature began focusing on memory theories, but research primarily looked at memorable tourism experiences and how to better attract tourists. Zhang wanted to dive deeper into how travel memories affect a person’s development and identity. This retrospective longitudinal study examined 115 alumni who traveled as part of the College of Health & Human Performance’s South Pacific program, or the Florida Down Under Program, from 2007 to 2019. The program, led by Gibson, brings students to Australia for four weeks, New Zealand for four weeks, and/or Fiji for 10 days to study sustainability, with trips including a snorkeling expedition to the Great Barrier Reef and to Mungalla Station (a land occupied by the Nywaigi Aboriginal Land Corporation). These students’ memories of studying abroad proved to be positive and an “important building block to enhance the existing feeling of self,” Zhang said. For example, one study participant shared that reflecting on her experience in Australia was a conversation starter that sparked an initial social connection with her now husband, who had also traveled to Australia on a separate trip. Other students said the program impacted their travel behaviors such as spending money, as well as their eco-conscious behaviors like using coral-reef-friendly sunscreen. Overall, Gibson believes that experiential learning like studying abroad plays a significant role in helping students find themselves at pivotal times in their lives. In fact, research from the Consortium for Analysis of Student Success through International Education shows that students who participate in study abroad programs may earn higher grades, be more likely to graduate, and be better positioned for the global workforce. “Getting students out of the classroom and pushing them out of their comfort zone is where they learn,” Gibson said. “We need to think about the undergraduate experience as more than earning credits for a degree. Study abroad provides students with friends, experience, and direction, and that’s very crucial, especially at a large university. Study abroad allows students to find their tribe.”
Experts share practical guidance for a healthier, happier holiday season
The holiday season is a time of tradition, connection and celebration – but it also brings its own set of challenges, from food safety concerns to emotional stress. University of Delaware experts are available to speak with reporters and provide practical, research-backed guidance to help audiences make the most of the season. Avoid common food safety mistakes Holiday meals are a centerpiece of celebration, but preparing them safely is essential. Diane Oliver, UD Health and Well-being Extension agent, has identified the top five mistakes people make when handling and preparing turkey – and how to avoid them. She can offer timely food safety tips to ensure families enjoy their meals without risk. Protect your mental well-being The holidays can stir up complex emotions as families come together. UD psychology professors Franssy Zablah and Zachary Meehan can provide expert insight into how to maintain mental wellness, manage stress, and set healthy boundaries during holiday gatherings. Find genuine holiday joy Beyond checklists and shopping, how do people actually experience lasting happiness during the holidays? Assistant professor Amit Kumar can share research-backed strategies on pursuing meaningful, authentic joy rather than fleeting holiday pressure. Preserve your decorations for years to come Family ornaments and decorations often carry sentimental value. Art conservation expert Debra Hess Norris can explain how to properly store and care for holiday decorations so they remain vibrant and intact year after year. Connect with these experts All of these University of Delaware experts are available for media interviews and commentary. Reporters and editors interested in speaking with them can reach out to mediarelations@udel.edu for a quick response and support.
