Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Expert Spotlight: AI and Accreditation in Behavioral Health
Recently, Mike Johnson, MA, CAP, Senior Managing Director of Behavioral Health at CARF International sat down with the host of the podcast No Notes to discuss how the major accrediting agencies are thinking about AI—and whether an organization’s use of AI ultimately impacts their accreditation. Tune into this captivating discussion using the link below. Michael makes a point in the podcast that CARF has no issue with AI tools being used for documentation as long as the notes meet established standards for quality and accuracy. There are positive effects and benefits of responsible AI use in behavioral health—from reduced provider burnout and turnover to better client engagement and outcomes. But, how do these technologies stack up against behavioral health accreditation standards? And how do the industry’s top accreditation bodies feel about the use of AI in behavioral health practice? Michael Johnson is the CARF International Senior Managing Director of Behavioral Health. If you are looking to know more or connect with Michael, view his profile below to arrange an interview today.
Villanova Nursing Professor Addresses Overlooked Roles in Mental Health Care
Mental health crises, such as suicidal ideations or attempts, present profound challenges, not only for the individuals experiencing them, but also for the families and professionals who provide care. Parents, in particular, often find themselves stepping into the role of a primary healthcare provider when a child returns home from mental health inpatient treatment. Guy Weissinger, PhD, MPhil, RN, the Diane Foley Parrett Endowed Assistant Professor of Nursing at Villanova University’s M. Louise Fitzpatrick College of Nursing, explores the complex challenges parents face during these delicate situations and how the healthcare system can better prepare them for these responsibilities. Dr. Weissinger’s research also emphasizes the need to rethink how educators train and support healthcare providers involved in mental health care and suicide prevention. In a recent conversation, Dr. Weissinger shared insights into his research, the unique roles that parents and nurses have in managing mental health crises and the steps needed to create a more holistic and inclusive approach to care. Q: A large part of your research examines the parents of youth who are experiencing mental health crises. What challenges do parents face when tasked with providing ongoing healthcare for their children who might be facing these issues? Dr. Weissinger: There’s been a lot of recent work looking at how parents can be better supported in any kind of health crisis as their child is experiencing it. At the end of the day, a physician, therapist or nurse practitioner (NP) can support a patient with their clinical expertise in the hospital, but when those patients return home, the responsibility most often falls on the parent to continue that care. If we're then requiring parents to act as case managers and healthcare providers for their children, how can we best equip them to fill those roles? Q: How does a parent’s role in managing a child’s mental health crisis differ from the roles of a physician or therapist? Dr. Weissinger: I studied family intervention science, which looks at both the individual and family processes that may be related to adolescent suicide risk or any other mental health concern, so I like to ask the question: what is this person's role in their family system? Parents oftentimes have a particular role in the family system, and when there's any kind of mental health crisis, that role may have to change: how they act, what tasks they perform, etc. I’m studying the role transition of a parent during a suicide crisis—what are their struggles and what are parents identifying as their big needs? I’m finding that a lot of parents are feeling really alone or shameful in some way, and then they’re using their own money, time or social resources to try to provide care for their child. This often happens because they feel like the mental health system is not providing the support they need to take on that role, so they’re trying to figure out what to do on their own. Q: An additional part of your research surrounds the role of a nurse practitioner in suicide crises. What are some of the findings from your recent research with nurse practitioners (NPs) about their suicide prevention education? Dr. Weissinger: The findings, which will soon be published, are really interesting because they’re very mixed. I went out and asked NPs what they were taught about suicide prevention and when they were taught it as part of their education and training. Some said that their primary care education integrated suicide prevention as a focus of the curriculum. Others mentioned that they didn’t learn about it in their undergraduate or master’s programs, but they’re still expected to know about suicide prevention as part of their job responsibilities. It’s important to highlight these discrepancies and how we need to think about adapting nursing education to include these important topics. Q: What are some of the overlooked responsibilities and challenges of nurses in managing adolescent mental health? Dr. Weissinger: A large percentage of primary care visits are currently conducted by nurse practitioners, and now suicide screenings are expected to be a standard of practice in primary care visits, even though some NPs don't have that specific training. NPs are often left out of consideration and conversation around best practices related to suicide prevention, so we need to make sure that anyone who's conducting these screenings surrounding suicide has the training and the preparation to do so. It's a difficult conversation for NPs to have, especially when they’re working with kids and families. Q: Why is suicide prevention important to study from a nursing lens? Dr. Weissinger: So much mental health research lumps together groups or only studies psychologists and physicians, so a lot of people who provide mental health services or do suicide prevention screenings are left out of these studies. For example, nurses provide a majority of the discharge education on what parents are expected to do at home when a child leaves the hospital—whether that’s administering injections for a child with diabetes or making a house safer for preventing self-harm. Most of the time, a nurse is walking parents through next steps, answering questions and checking in on patient progress. It’s not the psychologists who evaluated the child, or the physicians who decided that the individual needed to be inpatient, it’s the nurses who are providing those points of contact. Q: What do you hope is the main takeaway from your work surrounding mental health and suicide crises? Dr. Weissinger: Suicide is a really complex thing to address, and it needs to be a conversation that isn’t looking for a silver bullet. It’s a conversation that asks the questions: how do we improve the mental health care system? How do we get primary care providers trained and involved in these discussions? How do we best prepare family members to support individuals who are struggling? Not all researchers need to work on every part of this, but it needs to be a total, all-encompassing effort.
President Trump’s Quick Executive Order Actions
Hofstra Law Professor James Sample discussed the quick pace of President Donald Trump’s executive order actions in the Newsday article “Legal observers say President Donald Trump’s quick pace could be an advantage.” Democratic state attorneys general and legal advocacy groups have said more lawsuits are on the way as they push back against Trump’s directives. But unlike his first term when he was a Washington novice surrounded by a revolving door of competing advisers, this term he is surrounded by longtime loyalists, who have been publicly anticipating the legal battles to come. “I think the strategy here is to flood the zone with orders and actions, knowing that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for opponents of his policies to stop them all,” said James Sample, a constitutional law professor at Hofstra Law School.
Has the SuperBowl Priced Itself out of Fans?
It's arguably one of the 'must-see' sporting events in the world. But this year fans seem to be a little reluctant to spend those hard earned dollars to watch the Kansas City Chiefs attempt a three-peat and a chance at history. It's a topic that's getting a lot of coverage leading up to the big game this Sunday. The Kansas City Chiefs might make history this weekend, but ticket prices aren’t reflecting that. The cheapest ticket for Super Bowl LIX in New Orleans has fallen below $4,000 on the secondary market, according to reseller TickPick, marking a 30% decline over the past week — and more than 50% cheaper compared to last year’s record-breaking Super Bowl. The Chiefs, who face the Philadelphia Eagles on Sunday, are hoping to be the first team to win three successive Super Bowl rings. Despite that historic feat on the line, fans apparently aren’t excited to splash out big bucks. There are a few potential reasons related to this year’s host city — and perhaps a slight dose of Chiefs fatigue. Last year’s matchup between the Chiefs and San Francisco 49ers was the most expensive Super Bowl on record, partly because it took place in the party mecca of Las Vegas for the first time. However, New Orleans “doesn’t have the same appeal” as Las Vegas, TickPick CEO Brett Goldberg said. New Orleans’ larger seating capacity is pushing prices lower as well, Goldberg said. The Caesars Superdome holds about 74,000 seats, whereas the Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas holds around 65,000 seats. The host city is also still reeling from a terrorist attack last month when a man drove a pickup truck into a crowd and opened fire, killing 14 people and injuring at least 35. Then there’s the matchup itself. Football fans are bored by a third straight Chiefs Super Bowl bid, resulting in TickPick “seeing less interest from fans looking to attend,” Goldberg told CNN. “Had the Detroit Lions, Washington Commanders or Buffalo Bills made it this far, it’d be a much different story as it relates to current prices.” February 03 - CNN It's an interesting topic and there are questions to be asked Does ticket demand and attendance really matter to the NFL and its sponsors? Why is viewership more important than attendance and ticket prices for the Super Bowl? Location, location, location. It’s always the same issue but what’s different this year? The NFL is big business and if you're a journalist covering the Super Bowl this Sunday - then let us help with your stories. Kirk Wakefield, Ph.D., is The Edwin W. Streetman Professor of Retail Marketing at Baylor University, where he is the Executive Director of the Curb Center for Sales Strategy in Sports and Entertainment (S3E) program in the Hankamer School of Business. Kirk is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon ow to arrange an interview today.
Annual Healthy Georgia Report looks at public health in the Peach State
The fourth edition of the “Healthy Georgia: Our State of Public Health” report has been released by the Institute of Public and Preventive Health in Augusta University’s School of Public Health. Within the 64 pages of the report is a snapshot of how healthy Georgians are compared to citizens across the 12 states that make up the Southeastern Region (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia) and the entire United States. The 2025 edition addresses 31 health topics and has been expanded this year to include multimorbidity; long COVID-19; HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis infection rates; opioid and methamphetamine drug use; suicides; and vaping. Biplab Datta, PhD, assistant professor in the Department of Health Management, Economics, and Policy in SPH, heads up the team of IPPH faculty and staff who create the report each year. Datta credits Jen Jaremski, research associate, and Kit Wooten, public health analyst, with handling much of the work of bringing the report to life. Together, Jaremski and Wooten collected and organized all of the needed assets and organized the 64-page document, preparing it for print and the web. “Every year we strive to present data in a way that policymakers may find helpful in making policy choices,” Datta said. “There are several new topics that were added to this year’s report and some of those are concerning for the state of Georgia, particularly the communicable diseases like HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis. High prevalence rates of these conditions in Georgia, compared to the rest of the U.S. and the Southeastern Region, warrant attention of the public health community.” Georgia has the second-highest rate of HIV infections in the U.S., fourth-highest rates of gonorrhea, sixth-highest for chlamydia and 13th for syphilis. Something that is also new in this year’s report is a comparison of numbers from 2019, or before the COVID-19 pandemic began, compared to after the pandemic for certain conditions. Also coming out of the pandemic, the report looks at how long COVID has affected Georgians, with the state ranking 24th in the nation for rates of long COVID. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, long COVID is defined as a chronic condition that occurs after COVID-19 infection and is present for at least three months. On top of looking at comparisons between Georgia and the Southeast and the nation, Datta noted a clearer picture is starting to emerge concerning the difference in urban and rural areas within the state. “For several chronic conditions, like hypertension, diabetes and multimorbidity, we clearly see a striking difference between rural and urban residents of Georgia,” Datta said. Hypertension affects 44.1% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 35% in urban areas, while diabetes affects 17.5% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 12.3% of those in urban areas. Hypertension and diabetes are major risk factors for cardiovascular disease, which affects 12.2% of adults in rural areas compared to 8.3% of adults in urban areas of Georgia. “Hypertension and diabetes are the major risk factors for heart disease, which is the leading cause of death in the U.S. and worldwide, so these are some concerning numbers to see,” Datta said. Multimorbidity, which is when a person has multiple chronic conditions, including obesity, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, depression, kidney disease, diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, cardiovascular disease, cancer, skin cancer and arthritis, affects 57.4% of adults in rural Georgia compared to 49% of adults in urban areas of the state. These rates are significantly lower than the rest of the Southeast but on par with the rest of the country. When comparing Georgia to the U.S. national average, adults in Georgia have lower rates of cancer and methamphetamine use but higher rates of childhood asthma and adult obesity. At the same time, rates of adult asthma and adult obesity among Georgians were comparable to the averages seen in the Southeast. Interestingly, while adult health insurance coverage was significantly lower than the U.S. national and Southeast Regional averages, the child health insurance coverage in Georgia was comparable to both national and regional averages. The Healthy Georgia Report is the only report of its kind in the state Looking to know more or connect with Biplab Datta, PhD? Then let us help. Dr. Datta is available to speak with media regarding this important topic. Simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
How Philadelphia Eagles' head coach achieves Super success with 'Ted Lasso' management style
Not long after Nick Sirianni was hired by the Philadelphia Eagles in 2021, fans started noticing similarities between the head coach and TV’s Ted Lasso. The University of Delaware's Kyle Emich can discuss how Sirianni's team approach compares to the more top-down structure favored by Kansas City Chiefs coach Andy Reid. Like Lasso – a high school football coach on the Apple TV show of the same name who takes over an English soccer club with no prior experience – Sirianni is responsible for the culture, first and foremost. He relies on his coordinators, who call the plays. In essence, he is a more collaborative leader. By contrast, Reid is a top-down coach who currently calls the plays and always has, dating back to his time as coach of the Eagles. Philadelphia fans became more than a little weary of him saying "that's on me" at post-game press conferences following disappointing losses. With back-to-back Super Bowl titles under his belt with the Chiefs, it's difficult to argue with the success of Reid's style now. This could be fodder for sports talk radio, but it's also something Emich, a professor of management, can discuss from an academic perspective. The professor says there's advantages and disadvantages to both: • "The main advantages for the top-down approach are speed of decision-making and extreme novelty (you can do whatever pops into your head). The advantages of the coordinator approach are a larger information base to draw from and specialized knowledge." • "The more team-based approach has a lot of potential, but is difficult to execute well because it requires coordination." Emich, who has discussed management and sports teams several times in the past (including Super Bowl LII, when the Eagles defeated the New England Patriots), is available for interviews.
A Beginner’s Guide to Expertise Marketing
Audiences today are consuming more digital content than ever, but they’ve also become far more discerning. Algorithms, AI search summaries, and social platforms have changed how information is discovered and trusted. The result is that organizations often get caught up in pushing out content quickly—only to be overlooked when it lacks depth or credibility. From misinformation to shallow click-driven posts, audiences are quick to disengage. What they’re seeking now are authoritative voices backed by proven expertise. That’s where Expertise Marketing comes in: a strategy focused on showcasing real knowledge, research, and experience in ways that build trust, attract attention, and strengthen reputation. According to Edelman’s Trust Barometer Study, experts play a vital role in establishing credibility amongst audiences and developing more meaningful interactions with businesses and organizations. As far back as their 2019 report results showed that 56% of people trust businesses as a source of news and information while only 47% trusted the government. On top of that, they also reported that 73% of participants were worried about false information or fake news being used as a weapon. This distrust has only gotten worse since COVID and the polarizing politics of recent years. With this in mind, there’s a real opportunity for knowledge-based organizations to step up and show their smarts through expertise marketing. What is Expertise Marketing? Expertise marketing is the practice of making the knowledge and skills of your human resources more visible to your partners and audiences. It draws attention to the value that your people can bring as brand ambassadors and strategically leverages the work your experts are doing to tell a more personal story. In many cases, expertise marketing can also be used to showcase your strengths in research and innovation. Creating a stronger digital presence, expertise marketing more effectively uses your channels to connect with audiences such as media, customers, partners and donors. It builds a sense of trust with your audiences and above all else, it helps establish your reputation as an industry leader. Expertise Marketing Defined: The practice of collectively promoting an organization's experts as brand ambassadors to demonstrate their skills or knowledge. Best practices to publish and connect organizational expertise in ways that foster internal discovery, collaboration, shared knowledge and diversity. Activities that leverage expertise to nurture conversations and connections with audiences such as media, customers, partners, government and funding agencies. How to Make Your Expertise More Visible Properly executed, expertise marketing is about harnessing your in-house expertise and making it more visible. By delivering comprehensive, relevant information in a visually engaging format, you can create a window into your organization that helps audiences better understand your offering and encourages more meaningful conversations. Here are three areas where expertise excels: On Your Website There’s a good chance that you already created touchpoints for expertise marketing but they’re just not optimized for audiences. For example, many organizations are unaware that the “About Page” is the second most visited page on a website and may overlook its potential for attracting audiences. Other webpages that strongly benefit from expert content include: Speaker’s Bureaus Media Rooms Employee Directories Faculty Directories Blogs Employee Intranets Awards Recognition Research & Technology Transfer Through Search Engines Content marketing and search engine optimization (SEO) go hand-in-hand – and it’s key to making your expertise more visible. In Google’s search algorithm, factors like trust and authority are significantly impacted by items such as content and expertise. While SEO is no small task, tools like the ExpertFile Platform are designed to make aggregating and optimizing expert content as seamless as possible. In addition, organizations can also improve their rankings by: Identifying and showcasing a range of expertise Using rich media to display expert content Regularly updating your website with expert content Producing content related to current trends and emerging news Through Distribution Networks Showcasing your experts isn’t just about hosting profiles on your own website—it’s about ensuring they are discoverable where key audiences are already looking. By publishing expert content on dedicated search engines such as expertfile.com and the ExpertFile Mobile App, organizations dramatically expand their reach beyond their immediate networks. These channels are designed for the very audiences that matter most—media, event organizers, research partners, donors, and prospective clients—who are actively searching for credible voices to inform stories, shape agendas, and build partnerships. Leveraging these distribution networks amplifies visibility, positioning your experts as go-to authorities well beyond the boundaries of your institutional website. In The Media For many organizations, media opportunities are an afterthought but it’s the perfect way to highlight your expertise and attract a broad range of audiences. Media outlets are constantly on the hunt for topic-specific experts to speak at conferences, weigh-in on their editorials and enhance the overall quality of their reporting. By making your experts more visible to this audience, you’re not only building your brand reputation as an industry authority but you’re also creating opportunities for new revenue. Starting an Expertise Marketing Program Bringing an expertise marketing program to life starts by taking a deeper look at your human resources and pinpointing the people in your organization who can support your expertise marketing initiatives. This post on Identifying Expertise is a great starting point for understanding what makes someone an expert and how you can position them for various tasks in your expertise marketing program. From there, it’s about getting buy-in from key stakeholders, collaborating across departments to surface expert content and strategizing with your team about where your expertise is best served. Download The Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing For a comprehensive look at how expertise marketing benefits the entire organization and drives measurable return on investment, follow the link below to download a copy of ExpertFile’s Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing for Corporate & Professional Services, Higher Education Institutions, Healthcare Institutions or Association & Not-for-Profits.
Covering the Tragic Crash in Washington - Our Experts Can Help
The shocking news of an in-air collision in Washington has garnered massive attention from media, airline authorities and industry experts. Reporters covering the story - rely on experts. And that's where's Florida Tech's Shem Malmquist was called to lend his expert perspective, insight and opinion on a story that's making international news. "It just shows that traffic is in our location, there's a potential collision hazard," said Shem Malmquist, a pilot and visiting instructor of general aviation and transport aircraft at the Florida Institute of Technology. And in certain situations, it will provide guidance for the pilots on how to avoid a collision, he said. For example, if TCAS believes the pilot needs to pay attention to other air traffic in the area, it may say "traffic traffic," Malmquist said. January 30 - CBC News Shem Malmquist, who is a pilot and instructor at the Florida Institute of Technology, said midair collisions are extremely rare. Malmquist said if they happen they normally happen at smaller airports without air traffic control towers like the Lantana Airport. "The only method of separating traffic is visually, as well as airplanes communicating their positions to other airplanes, and that's going to create more risk," Malmquist said. January 30 - WPTV/NBC News American Airlines Flight 5342 and a military helicopter collided mid-air late Wednesday night near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. Officials believe all 64 people aboard the airplane -- 60 passengers, 4 crew members -- and the three people aboard the helicopter are dead. Officials conducted a frantic rescue effort overnight, which transitioned to a recovery effort early Thursday. Many aboard the plane were in Wichita, Kansas for a figure skating competition. Captain Shem Malmquist, an aviation expert at Florida Institute of Technology, joins FOX 35 to talk more about what happened. January 30- Fox News Orlando Looking to connect with Shem Malmquist regarding this ongoing story? He's available, simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
The ethics of using AI in academic writing: Opportunities and challenges in education
A major topic buzzing around educational circles right now is the use of AI in academic writing. With AI tools becoming more sophisticated, students and educators find themselves navigating a new academic landscape. It’s both exciting and daunting. Joshua Wilson, an associate professor of education at the University of Delaware, can discuss this landscape. Drawing on his research in automated writing evaluation (AWE), Wilson explores how AI tools – particularly generative AI – can transform the teaching and learning of writing by supporting critical thinking and knowledge transformation. He emphasizes that AI can help writers overcome lower-level constraints, such as grammar and organization, enabling deeper reflection and metacognitive engagement. Additionally, AI tools hold promise for helping students structure their thoughts and ideas, serving as valuable aids in organizing ideas before they begin writing. Thus, making writing more accessible and less intimidating for learners at all levels. However, he cautions that the value of AI depends on its thoughtful integration into educational practices, alignment with learning theories, and addressing challenges such as equity, feedback accuracy, and ethical use. He provides actionable insights for educators, researchers, and policymakers on how AI can enhance writing instruction, critical thinking and accessibility while avoiding potential pitfalls. Wilson has appeared in publications including The Washington Post, The Baltimore Sun and The Philadelphia Inquirer. To speak with Wilson further about AI and writing, click on his profile.
Researchers looked at trust in scientists in 68 countries and found relatively high levels of trust everywhere The TISP Many Labs study of 71,922 people included those living in under-researched nations of the Global South The majority of survey participants believe that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. Public trust in scientists is still high, according to a survey carried out in 68 countries by an international team of 241 researchers, led by Dr Viktoria Cologna (Harvard University, ETH Zurich) and Dr Niels Mede (University of Zurich). The study found no evidence of the oft-repeated claim of a crisis of trust in science. The team, which included Aston University School of Psychology’s Dr James Reynolds and Dr Charlotte Pennington, also found that the majority of survey participants believed that scientists should be more involved in society and policymaking. This study is the result of the Trust in Science and Science-Related Populism (TISP) Many Labs study, a collaborative effort that allowed the authors to survey 71,922 people in 68 countries, including many under-researched countries in the ‘Global South’. For the first time since the COVID-19 pandemic, the study provides global, representative survey data on the populations and regions of the world in which researchers are perceived to be most trustworthy, the extent to which they should engage with the public and whether science is prioritising important research issues. Dr Mede said: “The study is the most comprehensive post-pandemic snapshot of trust in scientists, societal expectations of their involvement in society and policymaking and public views on research priorities.” Across 68 countries, the study finds that the majority of the public has a relatively high level of trust in scientists (mean trust level = 3.62, on a scale of 1 = very low trust to 5 = very high trust). The majority of respondents also perceive scientists as qualified (78%), honest (57%) and concerned about people’s wellbeing (56%). However, the results also reveal some areas of concern. Globally, less than half of respondents (42%) believe that scientists pay attention to the views of others. Additionally, many people felt that the priorities of science are not always well-aligned with their own priorities. The researchers call upon scientists to take the results seriously and find ways to be more receptive to feedback and more open to dialogue. The findings confirm the results of previous studies that show significant differences between countries and population groups. In particular, people with right-wing political views in Western countries tend to have less trust in scientists than those with left-wing views. This suggests that attitudes toward science tend to polarise along political lines. In most countries, however, political orientation and trust in scientists were not related. A majority of respondents want science to play an active role in society and policymaking. Globally, 83% of respondents believe that scientists should communicate with the public about science, providing an impetus for increased science communication efforts. Only a minority (23%) believe that scientists should not actively advocate for specific policies. 52% believe that scientists should be more involved in the policymaking process. Participants gave high priority to research to improve public health, solve energy problems and reduce poverty. On the other hand, research to develop defence and military technology was given a lower priority. In fact, participants explicitly believe that science is prioritising the development of defence and military technology more than they would like, highlighting a potential misalignment between public and scientific priorities. Dr Cologna said: “Our results show that most people in most countries have relatively high trust in scientists and want them to play an active role in society and policymaking”. Dr Reynolds, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This research demonstrates that people from all around the globe still have high trust in science and want scientists involved in policymaking. When we face great challenges, such as threats to public health or energy crises, the public recognise the importance that scientists can play and want us involved. This is also true of the UK where levels of public trust in science is one of the highest globally.” Dr Pennington, a senior lecturer at Aston University School of Psychology, said: “This project showcases the importance and power of big team science to answer fundamental questions about human behaviour. By pooling our expertise and resources, we were able to reach over 70,000 people and improve sample diversity and representation by recruiting from 68 countries. Overall, the study resulted in an optimistic finding – that people generally trust scientists and agree that they should engage more in society and policymaking. Such trust is important because it allows people to make research-informed decisions about their own lives.” Find out more about the research in Nature Human Behaviour by visiting https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02090-5.
