Experts Matter. Find Yours.

Do Wholesalers Discriminate Against AI in Procurement Practices?

If we deploy automation without thinking strategically about intelligence, too, isn’t AI likely to backfire on us? Airplane manufacturer, Boeing, made headlines in 2019 for all the wrong reasons. Its 737 Max aircraft was indefinitely grounded after two fatal crashes in the space of just six months had claimed the lives of 346 people. Investigation into the accidents revealed that updates to an automated system – the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, known as MACS – had failed to integrate one of two intelligent sensors, meaning the system lacked a critical security backstop. As the aircrafts switched into autopilot mode shortly after takeoff, the error sent them both into fatal nosedives within minutes. These tragedies highlight an issue with automation that needs more focused attention says Goizueta’s Ruomeng Cui, assistant professor of information systems and operation management. And it’s this: if we deploy automation without thinking strategically about intelligence too, is AI likely to backfire on us? Cui is an expert in operations strategies in digital retail and platform markets. To better understand the challenges surrounding automation and intelligence in operational processes, she teamed with Shichen Zhang of Tianjin University and Rutgers’ Meng Li to explore how AI brings value in the procurement space. With Deloitte reporting that almost 45% of Chief Procurement Officers globally are now using, piloting, or planning to integrate AI into their operations, these insights should provide interesting food for thought, says Cui. “AI isn’t just about being quicker, it’s also about being smarter. It can deliver automation but can also deliver predictive intelligence; and while these two dimensions might be correlated, one doesn’t necessarily imply the other – as the Boeing example demonstrates,” says Cui. From the tech perspective, there’s a lot of buzz about how AI is helping to drive decision-making, she adds. But there is still plenty that we don’t know about the operational dimensions to using artificial intelligence. “With international procurement, you’re basically talking about big retailers going in and requesting prices for goods or products from wholesale suppliers. And that’s a process that could, in theory, lend itself very well to AI, since it can automate simple (and tedious) tasks over and over again. So there’s a significant potential gain in companies outsourcing this kind of task to the machine.” But although the potential might be clear, Cui and her colleagues believe that simply automating these processes might not in fact yield optimal results; and could in fact work against buyers by encouraging suppliers to quote higher prices than they might in personalized, human transactions. A full article detailing Cui’s research is attached, within it – several theories were explored. Who Comes Out Ahead on Price? Humans or AI Chat Bots? “We speculated about the possibility of wholesalers discriminating against the AI,” says Cui. “Specifically, we wanted to know if the sellers would quote higher prices to AI bots than they would to human buyers, because at the end of the day these bots are just machines; they don’t bring the authenticity or sincerity of human beings.” When Machines are Smart, Discounts Rise “When wholesalers are just asked over and over for their prices, they know that they are dealing with a machine and the intuition is that the machine is not intelligent, that it doesn’t have market expertise, and that it isn’t capable of decision-making. There’s no incentive to build relationships or to engage in any kind of negotiating dynamic here.” The topic is fascinating, and given the increase of AI in the workplace – a timely one. And, if you are a journalist looking to cover this research or speak with Professor Ciu about the subjects of telework and productivity, simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.

Experts in the media: UConn Doctor Has Advice for Parents About COVID Vaccine for Kids 12-15

On Monday, the Food and Drug Administration gave emergency authorization to administer Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine to children as young as 12 years old. Coronavirus vaccine providers in Connecticut have started to open up appointments for this age group, and Dr. Jody Terranova, a pediatrician from the UConn School of Medicine, has answers to the questions parents might have. Q: Why has the FDA authorized the Pfizer vaccine for children as young as 12 years of age? A: Pfizer completed its clinical trials on children 12-15 years old and submitted the data to the FDA in March. The FDA has been reviewing that data for safety and effectiveness. The data shows that it is extremely effective and well-tolerated with similar side effects as adults. We have seen so far that the vaccine is just as safe in 12-to-15-year-olds as it is in 16 and up. Q: How soon will the vaccine be available to Connecticut children 12-15 years of age? A: It will be available immediately. Many of our current vaccination sites have Pfizer on hand and will be able to offer it to the younger age group right away. The expectation is that pharmacies and community vaccination sites run by our various healthcare systems across the state will be able to provide it within days. School-based clinics may be offered as an option as well. Q: Are there any safety concerns children and their parents need to keep top of mind post-vaccination? A: Similar to other vaccines and similar to the response we saw in older children and adults, the most common side effects are going to be pain at the injection site, fever, generalized fatigue or body aches. All of these resolve within a day or so and can be treated with over-the-counter medications if needed. Q: In our battle against COVID-19, why is it so critical for more youth to get vaccinated? A: There are a couple of reasons why it is critically important for our children to be vaccinated. The first is that while we have not seen children impacted as severely as older adults, they can still get quite sick from COVID-19 and suffer from its longer-term complications. Second, with children representing 20-25% of the communities they live in, we will never get close enough to herd immunity to stop the community spread without vaccinating a large number of children too. Q: For parents who may be on the fence about getting their young children vaccinated, or even themselves still, what’s your message to them as a pediatrician? A: We know that the vaccines are very safe. We have seen millions of people across the country and the world receive these vaccines. We know that COVID-19 is still in the community and can still cause great harm to individuals. Our fastest path back to normalcy and reducing the spread and the rise of new variants of COVID-19 is by vaccinating all of us If you’re a journalist looking to cover COVID-19 and the vaccination roll-out that now includes children and teens – then let us help. Dr. Terranova is available to speak with media – simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.

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.

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.”

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.

A Message from Dean Sarah Gehlert on the Derek Chauvin Verdict

When I heard the verdict read at the trial of Derek Chauvin, I was relieved that a change had been made in how excessive violence by police officers has been viewed and treated in courts. This gave me some hope that a door had finally been opened to create change. A single verdict does not even begin to erase all the lives lost over decades of police violence based on prejudice and discrimination. It does however signal that change is happening, or is at least possible, if we are vigilant. It can be a step taken toward ending systemic discrimination by race in how our judicial system considers the actions of police. The wisdom of George Floyd’s seven-year-old daughter, who stated that her dad “changed the world,” has been validated. We also recognize the wisdom and courage of Darnella Frazier, the Minnesota teenager who filmed the event, knowing that what she was witnessing was wrong. When the verdict came in, I was with a group of community activists from three California counties around Los Angeles. While group members expressed some elation for an episode of justice realized, some cautioned that this victory does not mean that all is well. Racism, and the discrimination that it engenders, continues to run rampant through our judicial system. Within the last week we have added the names of Daunte Wright and Adam Toledo to our protests and vigils. We hope this verdict is a turning point, but we will need to work to assure it. It is worth reading a publication from 2018 to understand the role that social work needs to play in ensuring effective and lasting change to our judicial system. In their paper entitled “The Futile Fourth Amendment,” Professor Osagie Obasogie and Postdoctoral Researcher Zachary Newman examine the Supreme Court case that established the standard for court adjudication of excessive force by police, and how this has perpetuated excessive use of force in many communities of color. Protesting alone will not create the change we want to see. It will require change in policy and practices to establish equal protection for all under the law. This is a moment for us as social workers to seize. We must not wait to act until there is another incident of police brutality or an unfair trial. We should use this moment to move forward with renewed conviction in our beliefs, using our training in policy, community organizing, management and planning, and clinical practice. We should always be the voices demanding equality under the law, saying that an end to systemic racism is possible. The world is ready for change and social work should be leading it, with those whom we serve. We should be the champions of social justice for the well-being of individuals, families and communities through innovative teaching of evidence-informed and practice-based skills, and pioneering transformative research. If not us, then who? Sarah Gehlert Dean

Social Work is Advancing Addiction Science Research

Tens of thousands of Americans die from drug use and addiction every year, with overdoses killing over 63,000 people in America in 2016, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Add in deaths linked to alcohol overuse and tobacco, and the number climbs above half a million Americans. The collective work of several researchers at the USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, in collaboration with other USC faculty and outside organizations, is advancing knowledge of substance use disorders. Social work has become a hub where researchers and practitioners drive understanding and improve treatment for this disease that impacts millions of families each year. “Either as a cause or consequence, addiction relates to every problem we deal with in social work,” said John Clapp, professor and associate dean for research and faculty development at the USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work. Addiction’s complexity The social work field is uniquely poised to help effect change because of its holistic approach to individual well-being and the public good. According to Clapp, substance use disorder problems are inherently ecological, impacting and being impacted by individuals, families, peers, neighborhoods, communities and public policy in complex and dynamic ways. Untangling those causes and effects and interdependencies is one part of the solution. The other part is understanding that simple solutions may stay out of reach. “We will not find a one-size-fits-all answer,” said Clapp. Looking at addiction as a genetic, psychological or sociological issue only shows one piece of the overall cause. A comprehensive approach is essential, he said, especially when statistics from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) show alcohol use disorders alone as the third leading cause of preventable death in the world. A hub for addiction science The need for a transdisciplinary response to this worldwide crisis was behind the 2018 creation of the USC Institute on Addiction Science (IAS), a joint venture between social work and the Keck School of Medicine of USC, with membership from 10 different schools, colleges and hospitals. Its vision is to strengthen the discipline of addiction science and improve the lives of those touched by the disease. Clapp is co-director of the institute and one of its founding architects. IAS is quickly becoming the foremost place for a broad effort focused on addiction that brings together researchers from the fields of public health, social work, law, public policy, mathematicians, computer engineers and others in recognition of the promise of new approaches to longstanding problems. The USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work has eight faculty making substantial contributions to the prevention of addiction-related disorders as members of the IAS: Professor Avalardo Valdez, associate professors Julie Cederbaum and Alice Cepeda, and assistant professors Jordan Davis, Shannon Dunn, Jungeun Olivia Lee, Danielle Madden, and Hans Oh. “Social work brings one of the broadest perspectives on the underpinnings and solutions to the addiction crisis,” said Adam Leventhal, director of IAS and professor of preventive medicine and psychology at Keck. “By approaching addiction as a health condition and a social justice issue, social work brings to the table the opportunity for high-impact, multi-modal intervention and social policy approaches, which are needed to address the addiction epidemic.” A holistic approach Social work faculty are raising the bar in addiction science research, developing new and novel approaches to improving outcomes for those affected by addiction. In a study recently published in Addiction, a multidisciplinary team lead by Davis and Clapp found gender differences in the risk factors for relapse following treatment for opioid use disorder. The study was the first in this field to use machine learning techniques to process large data sets and identify risk factors for relapse, said Davis, who also serves as associate director of the USC Center for Artificial Intelligence in Society (CAIS). The findings may result in more personalized treatment for opioid use disorder with lasting results. This dovetails with additional research Davis is conducting with computer science engineers at CAIS to collect and input neighborhood and census data into their models in an effort to better understand how these macro variables affect relapse. “We are finding that data points such as crime statistics, population density and concentrated poverty tend to be some of the most important predictors of relapse, over and above individual-level predictors such as impulsivity, motivation or gender,” Davis said. These findings echo Clapp’s description of addiction as ecological and point to the need for holistic solutions. “These machine learning techniques are helping us gain an apparent picture of what the most important factors are surrounding someone’s recovery,” Davis said. “Environment matters greatly.” Davis is also collaborating closely with Eric Pedersen, associate professor at Keck School of Medicine at USC, on several research efforts examining substance use among veterans. Most recently, they have assembled a survey group of approximately 1,200 veterans whom they survey quarterly about their well-being. A recently conducted survey of the group found that veterans with PTSD prior to the COVID-19 pandemic were now managing their symptoms with more frequent alcohol and cannabis use. Another joint research endeavor between the two is examining the use of mindfulness smart phone apps to help reduce substance use in Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans with PTSD and alcohol use disorder. Where well-being and inequalities intersect Jungeun Olivia Lee also seeks to decode the network of relationships between socioeconomic status, adverse childhood experiences and drug use. Her experience as a social work practitioner working directly with clients drives her motivation to demonstrate to policymakers what she sees as a linkage between unemployment, economic stress and substance use disorders. She is lead author on a paper published in Nicotine & Tobacco Research that found unemployment may advance nicotine addiction among young adults, rather than the idea that nicotine addiction may lead to unemployment. Lee’s research interests lie at the intersection of substance use and co-occurring mental health, social inequalities (such as poverty and low socioeconomic status), and adverse childhood experiences. She is interested in combining these three areas of inquiry to explore their influence on addictive behavior that can persist over generations of at-risk families, such as adolescent mothers and their children. Her memories of working directly with clients struggling with the impact of addiction remain clear in her mind. When Lee hears policymakers and others suggest that individual willpower will solve substance use disorder problems, she has a straightforward response: “People are not born with addiction.” In her view, many factors contribute to the triggered distress, including socioeconomic status and adverse childhood experiences. Lee is exploring an idea with other IAS researchers to investigate the relationship between financial strain and employment uncertainty and addiction. “Individual circumstances, such as losing a job, certainly influence substance use, but policy-level decisions, such as the generosity of unemployment insurance, can mitigate the impact,” she said. Transdisciplinary collaboration with social scientists, psychologists and medical researchers at IAS and across the USC campus enriches and amplifies her work. “We are breaking down discipline-specific silos and bringing new and valuable perspectives to this work,” she said. “The synergy is both useful and inspiring.” Looking ahead Researchers also hope to spark interest in the field among the next generation. A new minor for undergraduate students in addiction science was introduced at USC in Fall 2020. The minor is an interdisciplinary collaboration of the Keck School of Medicine, the USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, the USC School of Pharmacy and the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences. It is designed to provide students with a transdisciplinary approach to understanding and treatment of the broad spectrum of addiction-related problems. The goal of addiction science research and education is to improve the long-term effect of addiction treatment and save lives. As society’s understanding of the cause of addiction grows, researchers like those in the school of social work and the IAS strive to bridge the gap between science, practice and policy to positively impact outcomes for those affected by addiction.

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."

Forbes Ranks ChristianaCare as one of the best employers for diversity and inclusion in the United States

ChristianaCare also ranks as No. 1 overall employer for diversity and inclusion in Delaware, No. 14 among U.S. health systems (WILMINGTON, Del. – April 23) magazine ranked ChristianaCare as one of the best employers for diversity and inclusion in the United States in its list of Best Employers for Diversity 2021. ChristianaCare also ranked as the No. 1 employer for diversity in Delaware and the No. 14 health system for diversity in the nation. ChristianaCare ranked 121st out of the 500 employers that were recognized. “At ChristianaCare, our mission is simple, but profound – we take care of people,” said Janice Nevin, M.D., MPH, president and CEO of ChristianaCare, which is Delaware’s largest private employer. “And caring for people means that we work together, guided by our values of love and excellence, to bring equity and inclusion to everyone we serve, including our own caregivers. We are committed to building a workforce that reflects the diverse communities we serve, as we aspire to deliver high-quality, accessible care and achieve health equity.” ChristianaCare has committed to being an anti-racism organization and works to ensure that commitment is reflected through the organization’s policies, programs, and practices. (Read more about ChristianaCare’s anti-racism commitment here.) ChristianaCare’s inclusion efforts also include the launch of 10 employee resource groups, which connect caregivers who have a common interest or bond with one another. Formed by employees across all demographics – such as disability, gender, race, military status, national origin, sexual orientation, etc. – these voluntary grassroots groups work to improve inclusion and diversity at ChristianaCare. More than 750 caregivers at ChristianaCare participate in employee resource groups. ChristianaCare also recently launched LeadershipDNA, a new leadership development program that is specifically targeted to underrepresented, diverse populations and is designed to foster professional and career development. “We are grateful for this recognition, which affirms that our organization is committed to taking on the meaningful work to help our caregivers be exceptional today and even better tomorrow,” said Pamela Ridgeway, chief diversity officer and vice president of Inclusion and Diversity at ChristianaCare. “The fact that our caregivers can see the value and feel the impact of our inclusion and diversity efforts illustrates the importance for us to continue to push onward.” Forbes’ Best Employers for Diversity were identified from an independent survey of more than 50,000 U.S. employees working for companies employing at least 1,000 people in their U.S. operations. The employees were asked to give their opinion on a series of statements surrounding the topic of age, gender equality, ethnicity, disability, LGBTQ+, and general diversity concerning their own employer. The survey also gave survey participants the chance to evaluate other employers in their respective industries that stand out with regard to diversity. Only the recommendations of minority groups were considered. Also factored in was diversity engagement amongst managers and diversity among leadership. About ChristianaCare Headquartered in Wilmington, Delaware, ChristianaCare is one of the country’s most dynamic health care organizations, centered on improving health outcomes, making high-quality care more accessible and lowering health care costs. ChristianaCare includes an extensive network of primary care and outpatient services, home health care, urgent care centers, three hospitals (1,299 beds), a freestanding emergency department, a Level I trauma center and a Level III neonatal intensive care unit, a comprehensive stroke center and regional centers of excellence in heart and vascular care, cancer care and women’s health. It also includes the pioneering Gene Editing Institute. ChristianaCare is nationally recognized as a great place to work, rated by Forbes as the 5th best health system to work for in the United States and by IDG Computerworld as one of the nation’s Best Places to Work in IT. ChristianaCare is rated by HealthGrades as one of America’s 50 Best Hospitals and continually ranked among the nation’s best by U.S. News & World Report, Newsweek and other national quality ratings. ChristianaCare is a nonprofit teaching health system with more than 260 residents and fellows. With the unique CareVio™ data-powered care coordination service and a focus on population health and value-based care, ChristianaCare is shaping the future of health care. ####

Combating Vaccine Hesitancy Through Messaging

As vaccine hesitancy becomes a threat to Americans' decision to get the COVID vaccine, persuasive messaging is at the forefront of changing people's minds. Allyson Levin, PhD, a visiting assistant professor of communication, believes social media messaging plays a key role—and that post-vaccination selfies can actually help convince people to get the vaccine. "When we don't know what to do, we look to others to guide our behavior," stated Dr. Levin. "It is really important when we see people who share online that they were vaccinated—who are close to us, our friends or family and people we look up to like influencers and celebrities." Further, online communities create a world where it appears that people are getting vaccinated actively. "If we look around and see an environment where people are getting vaccinated, we will want to get vaccinated as well. That will encourage vaccination. At least if we trust those people around us," said Dr. Levin. Dr. Levin also contends that the social media platform TikTok can be extremely useful when information is "scientifically valid, evidence-based and coming from people who understand science like medical professionals." "A unique opportunity we have with TikTok is that users are receiving health information when they aren't looking for it," said Dr. Levin. In addition, she notes the incredible impact company advertisements endorsing COVID vaccinations have had on their wider acceptance. "At the end of the day, it is wonderful that brands are amplifying these messages, like Budweiser donating their airtime during the Super Bowl. There is an element of public relations, too: The brands look good for promoting these messages. But the more people that see these messages, the better." However, Dr. Levin pointed out that, while messaging is extremely important, vaccine availability is crucial. "Access is equally important. Unless people can actually have access to the vaccinations, the message is just one part of it," stated Dr. Levin.