Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Research Reveals Uptick in Hostility toward Black Americans during Tough Economic Times

Goizueta Experts Encourage Business Leaders to Double Down on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Efforts. Do recessions stoke racial tension? When there’s an economic downturn, are White Americans more likely to feel distrust or even animosity towards their Black peers? Researchers have long wondered about the broader societal impact of financial recessions, but until recently their effects on race relations have been unclear. In a recent paper, Emily Bianchi, associate professor of organization and management, Erika Hall, assistant professor of organization and management, and Sarah Lee 19PhD, assistant professor of management, Dominican University of California and visiting professor of organizational behavior, Pepperdine University, find that there is indeed a subtle uptick in hostility towards Black Americans during bad economic times. Their paper, Reexamining the Link Between Economic Downturns and Racial Antipathy, examines publicly available data on attitudes, political trends, and behavioral patterns in the U.S. Sarah Lee 19PhD While businesses tend to cut diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts during economic downturns, Bianchi and Hall underscore that these efforts may be even more critical during these times. To study this phenomenon, the researchers analyzed more than 20 years of data from the American National Election Survey (ANES), a biannual survey capturing political affiliations and perceptions of political candidates from 1964 until 2012. They analyzed how White Americans’ attitudes towards Blacks changed depending on the state of the economy and found that in worse economic times, Whites felt more negatively about Blacks. As Bianchi notes: “we were able to analyze the responses of more than 30,000 individuals who identified as White. And we do find that for decades – between the 1960s and the first part of the 21 century – White Americans feel less warmly about Black Americans during times of financial hardship.” Emily Bianchi, associate professor of organization and management In a second study, Bianchi, Hall, and Lee examined data from Project Implicit, a popular website that allows people to test their own implicit bias and also gauges racial attitudes. Again, the authors found that in worse economic times, White Americans held more negative implicit and explicit attitudes about race. In particular, during the Great Recession, they found that White’s attitudes towards Blacks became substantially more negative in states that were hard hit by the economic crisis compared to states in which the economic downturn was less severe. Having established that economic conditions affected fluctuations in attitudes towards race, the authors then examined whether these emotional shifts translated into actual behavioral outcomes. In other words, if Whites felt more negatively towards Blacks during recessions would this mean that Black professionals were less likely to be successful when the economy floundered? They tested this possibility by looking at two domains of public activity: record sales and voting patterns. First, they examined data from the Billboard Top 10 American songs between 1980 and 2014 and recorded the race of each musician who secured a Billboard hit. They found that in bad economic years, Black musicians were 90% less likely to have a top 10 hit, presumably because White consumers (by far the biggest consumer group during this period) were less likely to support them. Next, they examined the results of more than 8000 elections to the U.S. House of Representatives over the same period. They found that in bad economic times, Black politicians were 21% less likely to win elections. Interestingly, the converse also appears to be true. In good times, Black musicians and politicians fared much better in the polls and the charts – pointing to a certain fluidity in attitudes, says Bianchi. “Across these very different domains, studies, and sample sizes, we find the same consistent pattern: when times are tough, White Americans feel more animosity towards Black Americans and are less likely to support Black musicians or politicians. When things pick up, White Americans have more positive attitudes towards Black Americans and are more likely to endorse Black musicians and Black candidates.” The authors attribute these effects to innate human feelings of fear in the face of threat. Economic threats or shocks tend to evoke uncertainty and fear about what is to come. This translates into greater distrust of others, particularly those perceived as different in some way. And it’s an effect, they argue, that should be very much on the radar of businesses and decision-makers. Erika Hall, assistant professor of organization and management The research cites, “Anecdotally, we know that when times are good, organizations will tend to prioritize their efforts in the area of diversity and inclusion. But while this is critically important at all times, our research suggest that these efforts are probably even more important when times are tough.” All of this points to a need to attend to these issues more acutely when there’s a downturn, says Bianchi. And she cautions that this is likely to be counterintuitive to most leaders, who are likely more inclined to sideline diversity efforts when the economy slides. In terms of the current debate around race relations in the US, however, Bianchi stresses that the economic dimension is just one piece of a “very complicated puzzle.” “What we have seen and are seeing in 2020 and 2021 is a confluence of many major factors: a pandemic that has put a lot of people out of work, and that has put everyone on edge, punctuated by some horrific and well documented instances of violence against Black citizens,” Bianchi says. “So many of these things are in the mixing pot, that it’s hard to pinpoint one specific cause behind the current race crisis in the U.S. So many things coming together at once that have put us in this moment.” Only time will tell how this might play out compared to what we saw in the 80s and 90s, which were economic fluctuations rather than a complete drop off a cliff, she says. It will be more difficult to tease apart the effect of the economy versus the effect of the pandemic versus the effect of police violence on America’s race relations – a situation that Bianchi describes as a “cauldron of mess.” That said, she stresses that for business leaders, now is a good time to double down on efforts to drive diversity and inclusion. “I’d suggest leaders be especially mindful that at times of economic stress such as we are currently experiencing, there is a very real danger of heightened racial animosity.” We’ve attached a full article with even more advice and helpful information from our experts – but if you are looking to learn more or cover this topic, we can help. All of our faculty are available to speak with media, simply click on either expert’s icon now – to book an interview today.

Queen's Speech: Measures to tackle obesity and food advertising bans

Two University of Warwick experts comment on measures to tackle obesity and food advertising that have been announced in the Queen’s Speech at the State Opening of the UK Parliament today. Dr Paul Coleman (pictured), from Warwick Medical School and the Warwick Obesity Network, said: We welcome the government's intention to tackle rising rates of obesity by restricting the advertising of products high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS) shown on TV before 9pm and a total online advertising ban However, the government must focus on all forms on online advertising, not simply traditional commercials. This ban must cover online ‘advergames’, which encourage children to win points by placing branded food item in the mouth of children’s characters. These games are notoriously difficult for the government to regulate. While we also welcome the decision to incentivise individuals to both eat better and exercise more, the government must recognise that increased wages, rather than one-off payments, are needed to ensure all families can access healthy food For many families the main barrier in purchasing healthy food is cost, with families regularly limiting the amount of money spent on food to cover the cost of other essentials. All families require the financial means to purchase healthy food. We would like to see new targets to end household food insecurity by the year 2030. Dr Thijs van Rens of the University of Warwick Department of Economics and the Warwick Obesity Network, said: Required calorie labelling for large out-of-home businesses is a welcome start to address the restaurant and take-away sector, where many people get a large and increasing share of their food. A ban on "junk food" advertising on TV and online is long overdue. While we welcome the government renewed commitment to announce a ban on advertising, it is now time to take action. We are still waiting on the government to publish the result of its consultation on this matter, which was announced in November of last year. In the meantime, overweight and obesity are set to overtake smoking as the biggest cause of preventable death in the UK. Overweight is the silent killer that we can do something about, just as deadly as Covid-19 and much more under our control. Advertising is one of the elements of an environment that nudges, forces and tricks parents and children into buying and consuming food that makes them unhealthy, overweight and eventually kills them. Effective action against HFSS food advertising means banning advertising anywhere where children are likely to see it, which means both on telly and online

How does the job market look for the Class of 2021 ? The answer: much better, says IU expert

As the class of 2021 graduates this weekend to embark on new challenges and careers, Rebecca Cook, executive director of undergraduate career services at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business, reflects on the current job market and offers insights into what summer internships may be like for current students. “The summer of 2020 was a mess for student internships and full-time roles, with pretty much all either going virtual or, in the case of many internships, being cancelled altogether as companies tried to figure out business during the pandemic. Luckily, the job outlook for both full-time roles and internships in May 2021 looks a lot different – and a lot better. “The job market is hopping right now with a significant number of internship and full-time opportunities, as companies open up and business grows. Industries such as professional services, technology, health care, manufacturing and financial services are all seeing significant upticks in job postings. Even companies hard-hit by the pandemic, such as retail and hospitality, are picking up their hiring. “While hiring is back to pre-pandemic levels in many industries, the level of competition for those roles has increased significantly. In a normal year, the majority of job seekers are that year’s graduates. However, this year we have 2021 grads plus some 2020 grads who still are seeking plus those who went to graduate school to put off job hunting during the pandemic and are now graduating. This all leads to a much more competitive job market and one where a student needs to work to stand out from the crowd, particularly through networking and reaching out to potential connections at their companies of interest. “We recommend that students spend a lot more time networking than they may have in the past, creating a focused list of companies they are interested in and then spending the time to connect and speak with employees at those companies. Leverage any ‘warm’ connections possible, such as friends, family members, fellow Kelley alumni, faculty and staff recommendations. “An important point to remember is that roughly 75 percent of jobs are never advertised publicly, so the only way to find out about them is through networking. Many new jobs, as well as internships, may start out virtual “It’s important to note that many roles that students are entering will still be virtual, at least for the time being, as companies are very mixed as to if they are back in the office already, not returning to the office until early fall, or staying remote entirely. Internships in particular are likely going to be virtual, while full-time jobs are looking to be mixed, with many starting out virtual but then likely moving in-person when offices open up. While being virtual once again is probably disappointing, students should remember that they can be just as successful with a virtual full-time role or internship as an in-person one. “The key is staying connected with their supervisor and co-workers on a regular basis. They should also network with as many people in their full-time or internship company as possible, taking the initiative to set up Zoom (or whatever video conferencing tool that the company uses) meetings regularly in order to learn as much about the company and role as possible, as well as to build their network for future opportunities. “Overall, there are a lot of available opportunities out there for students – they just need to put in the time to network and get their name and brand known.” To schedule an interview with Cook, contact George Vlahakis at vlahakis@iu.edu.

Kelley School expert who studies causes and effects of recalls available to discuss Peloton

Peloton Interactive Inc. on May 5 announced that it is recalling its treadmills in a statement from CEO John Foley who also apologized for the company’s initial refusal to comply with federal safety regulators’ prior request for this action. George Ball, assistant professor of operations and decision technologies and Weimer Faculty Fellow at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business, studies the causes and effects of product recalls. Below are comments from Ball. He can be reached at gpball@indiana.edu. “Recall decisions like this are very difficult for managers to make, especially the ones that are high profile and associated with consumer injury. Managers have to balance the firm financial health with consumer safety. Thus, this is a rich area of research. The research that my colleagues and I undertake in this field deal both with the regulator and the firm. My comments will attempt to address both perspectives. “I will start with the regulator. I am currently involved in a research project with two colleagues that is specifically critiquing the Consumer Product Safety Commission for situations very similar to this Peloton recall. There are three main regulators in the US that oversee product quality and in particular recalls: the FDA, NHTSA and the CPSC. “Of those, CPSC is the least proactive and in my view, least successful in properly managing product recalls and their timeliness. This is because there are two main ways in which a firm can push firms to recall; they can force them to, or they can work with the firm management to help encourage them, or nudge them, to recall. The FDA is very good at influencing firms while NHTSA is quite good at mandating recalls. CPSC does neither well. “In particular, the FDA frequently chooses to use their relationships with senior quality executives at firms to nudge them to recall when FDA feels it may be necessary and the firm has not yet acted upon the quality problem. Conversely, NHTSA mandates approximately 20 to 30 percent of auto recalls, such that they choose to force instead of nudge. However, in both cases, while neither industry (medical products and autos) are perfect when it comes to recall timeliness, and both have suffered unfortunate well-known examples of firms dragging their feet in the recall decision, both have a well-developed approach. “CPSC mandates practically no recalls and they do not, from my research, have strong relationships with firm executives that can help them nudge firms to make the quick recall decision. Thus, this Peloton example is one of many in which consumer product firms may take too long to recall. “From the firm perspective. There are several potential red flags that may indicate the firm took too long. The longer a consumer product industry CEO has been in their role, the slower they are to make recall decisions. This is because the longer a CEO is in the role, the less open they are to taking responsibility for such high-profile mistakes. Interestingly, a new CEO, such as one who has been in their role for two to three years, is much more likely to recall a faulty product. “The CEO of Peloton definitely falls into the category of a fairly long-tenured CEO who has his reputation tied closely to the firm’s success. Secondly, the more stock a CEO owns in their firm, the slower they are to make the recall decision, because they are trying to protect their financial welfare. The CEO of Peloton appears to have a significant fortune at stake in Peloton stock, which would be consistent with our research. The more stock a CEO owns, the slower the firm take to recall defective products.”

Starter vape packs to be handed out in hospitals

A new trial from the University of East Anglia will see smokers attending hospital emergency departments given e-cigarette starter packs to help them quit. The initiative comes as a Cochrane Review - the international gold standard for high quality, trusted health information – about vaping is updated today. The review, led by the University of Oxford and involving the UEA team, shows how nicotine electronic cigarettes could increase the number of people who stop smoking compared to nicotine replacement therapy – such as chewing gum and patches – and compared to electronic cigarettes that do not contain nicotine. The new trial will offer stop smoking advice and an e-cigarette ‘starter pack’ to patients attending hospital emergency departments for any reason, to try to encourage and support them to quit smoking – even for those who might not have considered it before. The new trial is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and will be run by the Norwich Clinical Trials Unit at UEA. Prof Caitlin Notley, from UEA’s Norwich Medical School, said; “Many people who smoke want to quit, but find it difficult to succeed in the long term. “Electronic cigarettes mimic the experience of cigarette smoking because they are hand-held and generate a smoke-like vapour when used. They can be an attractive option for helping people switch from smoking, even if they have tried and failed in the past. “We know that they are much less harmful than smoking tobacco, and that they have been shown to help smokers quit. Trial co-lead Dr Ian Pope, also from UEA’s Norwich Medical School and an emergency physician, said: “Emergency Departments in England see over 24 million people each year of whom around a quarter are current smokers. “Attending the Emergency Department offers a valuable opportunity for people to be supported to quit smoking, which will improve their chances of recovery from whatever has brought them to hospital, and also prevent future illness.” The study will run over 30 months across five hospitals in England and Scotland – at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, the Royal London Hospital and Homerton University Hospital in London, Leicester Royal Infirmary and the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh. Smokers who agree to take part will be randomly assigned to receive either smoking advice during their emergency department wait, an e-cigarette starter pack and referral to local stop smoking services, or just written information about locally available stop smoking services. Both groups of patients will be asked if they are still smoking one, three and six months after they attended hospital. The research team hope to eventually recruit around 1,000 smokers to the trial. Prof Notley said: “We’ll be looking at the number of people who successfully quit smoking across both groups, to see which intervention works best. We’ll also work out how much it would cost to roll the scheme out nationally,” she added. ‘Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation (Review)’ is published by the Cochrane Library on April 29, 2021.

Thousands of men to trial prostate cancer home testing kit

Thousands of men worldwide are to receive a home test kit for prostate cancer – thanks to pioneering research from the University of East Anglia and the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (NNUH). The research team are trialling a new home-testing ‘Prostate Screening Box’ to collect men’s urine samples at-home. The urine samples will be used to analyse the health of the prostate in 2,000 men in the UK, Europe and Canada. This simple urine test is intended to diagnose aggressive prostate cancer and in a pilot study predicted which patients required treatment up to five years earlier than standard clinical methods. Lead researcher Dr Jeremy Clark from the University of East Anglia 'unboxes' the new home testing kit live on Sky News. The Prostate Screening Box has been developed in collaboration with REAL Digital International Limited to create a kit that fits through a standard letterbox. It means that men can provide a urine sample in the comfort of their own home, instead of going into a clinic or having to undergo an uncomfortable rectal examination. The research team hope that it could revolutionise diagnosis of the disease. Lead researcher Dr Jeremy Clark, from UEA’s Norwich Medical School, said: “Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men in the UK. However it usually develops slowly and the majority of cancers will not require treatment in a man’s lifetime. It is not a simple matter to predict which tumours will become aggressive, making it hard to decide on treatment for many men. “The most commonly used tests for prostate cancer include blood tests, a physical examination known as a digital rectal examination (DRE), an MRI scan or a biopsy. “We have developed the PUR (Prostate Urine Risk) test, which looks at gene expression in urine samples and provides vital information about whether a cancer is aggressive or ‘low risk’. “The Prostate Screening Box part sounds like quite a small innovation, but it means that in future the monitoring of cancer in men could be so much less stressful for them and reduce the number of expensive trips to the hospital. “The prostate lies just below the bladder. It constantly produces secretions which naturally flow into the urethra - the tube through which urine passes from the bladder. The prostatic secretions carry cells and molecules from all over the prostate which are flushed out of the body on urination. We collect these and examine them. It’s a way of sampling the whole prostate in one go. “As the prostate is constantly secreting, the levels of biomarkers in the urethra will build up with time. Collecting from the first wee of the day means that overnight secretions can be collected which makes the analysis more sensitive.” The team have previously trialled the kit with a small group of participants, but in the next phase of the research study are rolling it out to thousands. Men taking part in the trial will receive a home urine-sampling kit and will be asked to provide two urine samples – one to be taken first thing in the morning and the second an hour later. The samples will then be sent back to the lab for analysis. Dr Clark said: “Feedback from early participants showed that the at-home collection was much preferred over sample collection in a hospital. “We hope that using our Prostate Screening Box could in future revolutionise how those on ‘active surveillance’ are monitored for disease progression, with men only having to visit the clinic after a positive urine result. “This is in contrast to the current situation where men are recalled to the clinic every six to 12 months for a range of tests including DRE, PSA tests, painful and expensive biopsies and MRI. We are working to develop the test to help patients in three years’ time. “A negative test could enable men to only be retested every two to three years, relieving stress to the patient and reducing hospital workload,” he added. Robert Mills, Consultant Clinical Director in Urology at NNUH, said: “This simple, non-invasive urine test has the potential to significantly change how we diagnose and manage early prostate cancer for the benefit of patients and health care systems. It may enable us to avoid unnecessary diagnosis of low risk disease as well as managing patients more appropriately with surveillance for those with low risk of progression and early curative treatment for those at high risk of progression.” Paul Villanti, executive director of programs at Movember, said: “The PUR test has great potential to transform the way prostate cancer is managed. Not only can it accurately predict when a man’s disease will become aggressive and require treatment, but it has the added advantage of allowing men to complete it at home. “We are proud to have supported the development of the PUR test from its early stages as part of our Global Action Plan on Biomarkers, through to this trial involving thousands of men across the world. “Through our Global Action Plan on active surveillance, we have been able to identify hundreds of men from the UK, Germany, Italy and Canada who are suitable to take part in this trial. “We hope it will speed up the trial’s progress and get this test included as part of clinical care for men as quickly as possible.” The research has been funded by a Movember and Prostate Cancer UK Innovation award, the Masonic Charitable Foundation, the Bob Champion Cancer Trust, the King family, the Andy Ripley Memorial Fund, the Hargrave Foundation, Norfolk Freemasons and the Tesco Centenary Grant.

Expert available to discuss Facebook Oversight Board's decision on Trump's account

Reporters: Girish Mallapragada, a social media marketing expert at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business, is available Wednesday (May 5) to discuss the Facebook Oversight Board's decision to uphold Facebook's ban on former President Donald Trump. In advance of the announcement, Mallapragada, an associate professor of marketing and Weimer Faculty Fellow, said he questioned whether the board’s decision will have much of an impact on Trump’s outreach to his followers. He noted that Trump’s rise in popularity primarly came through his use of another social media platform, Twitter, and not as much through Facebook. “He was more adept at short form communication than long contextual messages. Twitter is ideal for the former, Facebook for the latter,” Mallapragada said. “Twitter is closest online to a live large audience, where he thrives.” “If Facebook allows him to comeback, it might make people unhappy and others happy, but I don’t think it would be impactful to make a big difference.” George Vlahakis, associate director of communications and media relations at Kelley, can help arrange for interviews with Mallapragada, and can be reached at vlahakis@iu.edu.

STORY: CAA is Canada’s most trusted brand for the second year running.

​The Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) has been named the most trusted brand in Canada for the second year in a row in the annual Gustavson Brand Trust Index, released today. Since being named in the Index five years ago, CAA has been one of the top two trusted brands, beating out several hundred other prominent international and Canadian brands. CAA has received the top trusted spot, four years consecutively in the insurance category. In addition, CAA leads the pack this year on the following trust attributes: good customer treatment and honest communications. Conducted by the Peter B. Gustavson School of Business at the University of Victoria, the sixth annual Gustavson Brand Trust Index asked more than 7,800 consumers to score 342 prominent Canadian companies and brands, across 27 industry sectors, on a range of brand value measures.​ Consumers are asked to assess their perception of the reliability, consistency, honesty, societal responsibility and integrity of the brands surveyed. CAA Clubs are active in communities across Canada. At the start of the pandemic, the clubs quickly pivoted to offer community services, including deliveries of food and medical supplies, free roadside assistance to medical workers, and calls to housebound seniors. Full report 2021 Gustavson Brand Trust Index

Assessing Biden's "Green Infrastructure" Plan From a Climate Perspective

In a virtual climate summit attended by leaders from all over the globe, President Joseph Biden announced plans for the United States to cut carbon emissions by as much as 52% by the year 2030. This commitment was outlined in what the Biden administration is calling a "green infrastructure" bill, one that has echoes of the Obama-era Green New Deal.  Samantha Chapman, PhD, a biology professor at Villanova University and co-director of the Center for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Stewardship, recently broke down the pros and cons of the bill with KYW Newsradio's Matt Leon. According to Dr. Chapman, the bill addresses what she identifies as the two major strategies for mitigating the negative effects of our warming planet: "preventing more climate change and adapting to climate change." Dr. Chapman considers that the strength of the bill lies in what she and Matt Leon refer to as "base hits" rather than the "home run" structure of the Green New Deal, meaning that Biden's plan relies on smaller, easily achievable goals—like incentivizing a switch to a more sustainable type of cement for building bridges—rather than sweeping reform in an effort to get the bill passed. Dr. Chapman calls the improvement of the power grid, which would support the manufacturing of electric cars and ease our nation's reliance on fossil fuels, "one of the biggest things in the bill." The professor also notes that she is hopeful about the installation of broadband in remote areas allowing for wider internet access and investment in energy-efficient affordable housing and job training to support communities that rely on the fossil fuel industries. "You can't just shut these people's livelihoods down and say 'okay, good luck' or just give them a payout. People want to have jobs that fulfill them," says Dr. Chapman. This direction, focusing on infrastructure with climate and equity at the center of the conversation, is in line with the Biden campaign's slogan to "build back better." Dr. Chapman points out that this bill creates an opportunity to focus on the word "better" by reevaluating the definition of infrastructure itself. "What is infrastructure?" she asks. "Is clean air infrastructure? Is clean water infrastructure? We know that natural infrastructures [feedback systems like our waterways and forests]—and we still have a lot of them in the U.S., thankfully—give us a buffer against climate change." As a climate scientist specializing in coastal ecosystems, Dr. Chapman told Leon she hopes to see an emphasis on these types of natural infrastructures. "I think that salt marshes and mangroves are really important in buffering our coast against big storms, so I want to see explicitly that we are going restore these places. It would be good for biodiversity; it would be good for people hanging out and kayaking; and it would help us protect against these big storms that are coming whether or not we cap our emissions. I think I would like to see more of these green barriers along our coast rather than big seawalls, and I haven't seen that exactly yet, but again the fine print's not there," she points out. "The bill's not done." Finally, Dr. Chapman spoke to how this infrastructure bill could have an impact on the future of the country if it is passed and observed. "I think there's still work to do on things like forests and biodiversity; there's always more work to do. I think it would be a massive step in the right direction. And then we'd have to go to the rest of the world and start doing some work there."

Autonomous cars expert: Dr Siddartha Khastgir

For stories on autonomous vehicles, Dr Siddartha Khastgir from WMG at the University of Warwick is one of the leading experts in the UK, and is available for comment.  His recent notable research includes developing the world’s largest public database for testing driverless cars: If you would like to interview him, contact press@warwick.ac.uk or L.Walton.1@warwick.ac.uk