Featured Post from University of Delaware

University of Delaware's Center for Political Communication unveils new vision, goals and leadership

Dr. Dannagal Young takes over as director of the center, which will produce research on media and politics and serve as a vital resource for journalists

Sep 4, 2024

3 min

Dannagal Young
CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


The University of Delaware's Center for Political Communication (CPC) is excited to announce a transformative new chapter with the unveiling of its updated vision, goals and leadership for 2024 and beyond. Since its founding in 2010, the CPC has been at the forefront of innovative public opinion research on politics and media, always with an eye towards protecting and improving American democracy.


With this new chapter, the CPC is actively integrating political psychology (the study of how and why people make political judgments and form political beliefs) into the study of public opinion and media effects.


“Our vision is responsible democracy-centered journalism informed by our rigorous research on Americans’ thoughts, feelings, knowledge and behaviors,” says Dr. Dannagal Young, incoming Director of the Center for Political Communication. “In a few weeks, will be releasing new data on Americans’ knowledge and beliefs about abortion – an issue on which there are widespread misperceptions. Later this fall we are also launching an interdisciplinary initiative to understand the relationship between Americans’ personal wellbeing and their support for democratic institutions and norms.”


By producing high-quality research at the intersection of media, politics and psychology, the CPC strives to elevate public conversations and inform news coverage to improve democratic health. Additionally, the Center seeks to serve as a vital resource for journalists, offering expert commentary and empirical data to encourage democratically responsible journalism.


With this new direction comes new leadership, bringing together a team of esteemed scholars from Political Science, Communication and Journalism:


Director Dr. Dannagal Young, Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, TED speaker, and author of Wrong: How Media, Politics, and Identity Drive our Appetite for Misinformation (Johns Hopkins, 2023) and Irony and Outrage: The Polarized Landscape of Rage, Fear, and Laugher in the U.S. (Oxford, 2020). Areas of Expertise: Misinformation, Political Satire, American Politics, the Psychology of Media Effects.


Associate Director Dr. Erin Cassese, Professor in the Departments of Political Science and International Relations, Communication, and Women and Gender Studies, co-author of Abortion Attitudes and Polarization in the American Electorate (Cambridge, 2024). Areas of Expertise: Gender, Abortion, Public Opinion, Campaigns and Elections.


Director of Research Dr. Phil Jones, Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations, current Editor-in-Chief at Public Opinion Quarterly. Areas of Expertise: Electoral Politics and Public Opinion.


Director of Engagement Dr. Lindsay Hoffman, Associate Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, and research leader for the American Council of Trustees and Alumni two-year Braver Angels project funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Areas of Expertise: Communication across Difference, Media Technologies, and Political Participation.


Delaware Politics Director Dr. Paul Brewer, Professor in the Departments of Communication and Political Science and International Relations, co-author of Science in the Media: Popular Images and Public Perceptions (Routledge, 2021), former editor of the International Journal of Public Opinion Research. Areas of Expertise: Delaware Politics, Media effects, Political and Science Communication, Public Opinion, and Perceptions of Science.


Delaware Debate Director: Nancy Karibjanian, Director of the University of Delaware’s Journalism program, faculty member in the Department of Communication, and former Director of the CPC with 30 years of broadcast experience. Areas of Expertise: Broadcast Journalism, and Delaware Debates.


The CPC’s goals reflect its commitment to a vibrant and collaborative research environment that engages scholars and students at all levels. The CPC will continue to spearhead interdisciplinary research across the domains of communication, political psychology, public opinion, media effects, and public policy. The Center offers applied research opportunities for both graduate and undergraduate students in communication and political science, as well as an undergraduate minor in political communication, thus mentoring the next generation of scholars and practitioners. The CPC is proud to put its academic research to work in service of American democratic health.




Connect with:
Dannagal Young

Dannagal Young

Professor, Communication

Prof. Young's research interests include political media effects, media psychology, public opinion and the psychology of misinformation.

Psychology of Political BeliefsPublic OpinionPolitical Media EffectsMedia PsychologyIntersection of Entertainment and Information
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Delaware

2 min

Discovery pinpoints potential Achilles’ Heel in HIV, opening new frontier in drug development

Scientists have long known that detecting HIV early is crucial in slowing and treating the virus. During the acute stage of infection, a single human cell can produce as many as 10,000 new HIV particles. A discovery led by the University of Delaware's Juan Perilla offers hope: A new drug target early in the virus's life cycle that could save millions of lives. In the surprising discovery, published Feb. 18 in Nature, Perilla and collaborators in the U.S. and the United Kingdom, have revealed a previously unknown role for the viral protein integrase. Scientists already knew that integrase helps HIV insert itself into human DNA. But this new study provides the first direct evidence that integrase plays a critical structural role earlier on in HIV’s life cycle — when the virus matures into an infectious force. Using high-resolution cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM), the research team – which also included UD doctoral student Juan S. Rey – found that integrase proteins form gluey filaments that line the inside of the capsid. Each segment of the filament slots neatly into the capsid’s hexagon-shaped tiles, while gripping tightly to HIV’s RNA genome. This zipper-like arrangement organizes and packs the virus, preparing it to hijack a cell and start making copies of itself. “Integrase plays a structural role inside the HIV capsid — nobody expected that,” Perilla said. “This protein forms filaments that anchor the RNA to the capsid. Without these filaments, the virus is non-infective.” Seeing inside HIV is no small feat. The capsid is only about 120 nanometers wide —roughly 1/800th the thickness of a human hair. It is incredibly small, fragile, densely packed and constantly changing, Perilla said. To reveal its hidden architecture, the researchers relied on deep collaboration and a combination of sophisticated microscopy, molecular modeling and experimentation. Read more about the science behind the study here. “The thing with HIV is that people are chronically living with it,” Perilla said. “Treatments are effective, but patients always need new therapeutics. We want to help develop the next generation of inhibitors and hope to have a significant contribution.” To reach Perilla directly and arrange an interview, visit his profile page. Interested reporters can also email MediaRelations@udel.edu.

3 min

Rethinking AI in the classroom: A literacy-first approach to generative technology

As schools nationwide navigate the rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence, educators are searching for guidance that goes beyond fear, hype or quick fixes. Rachel Karchmer-Klein, associate professor of literacy education at the University of Delaware, is helping lead that conversation. Her latest book, Putting AI to Work in Disciplinary Literacy: Shifting Mindsets and Guiding Classroom Instruction, offers research-based strategies for integrating AI into secondary classrooms without sacrificing critical thinking or deep learning. Here is how she is approaching the complex topic.  Q: Your new book focuses on AI in disciplinary literacy. What is the central message? Karchmer-Klein: Rather than positioning AI as a shortcut or replacement for student thinking, the book emphasizes a literacy-first approach that helps students critically evaluate, interrogate, and apply AI-generated information. This is important because schools and universities are grappling with rapid AI adoption, often without clear guidance grounded in learning theory, literacy research, or classroom practice. Q: What inspired this research? Karchmer-Klein: The book grew directly out of my work with preservice teachers, practicing educators, and school leaders who were asking practical but complex questions about AI: How do we use it responsibly? How do we prevent over-reliance? How do we teach students to question what AI produces? I also saw a gap between public conversations about AI which often focused on fear or efficiency and what teachers actually need: research-informed strategies that support deep learning. My long-standing research in digital literacies provided a natural foundation for addressing these questions. Q: What are some of the key findings from your work? Karchmer-Klein: AI is most effective when it is embedded within strong instructional design and disciplinary literacy practices, not treated as a stand-alone tool. The research and classroom examples illustrate that AI can support student learning when it is used to prompt reasoning, reveal misconceptions, provide feedback for revision, and encourage multiple perspectives. Another important development is the emphasis on teaching students to evaluate AI outputs critically by recognizing bias, inaccuracies, and limitations, rather than assuming correctness. Q: How could this work impact schools, teacher education programs and the broader public? Karchmer-Klein: For educators, this work provides concrete, evidence-based literacy strategies coupled with AI in ways that strengthen, not dilute, student thinking. For teacher education programs and school districts, it offers a research-based framework for professional development and policy conversations around AI use. More broadly, the work speaks to a public concern about how emerging technologies are shaping learning, helping to reframe AI as something that requires human judgment, ethical consideration, and strong literacy skills to use well. ABOUT RACHEL KARCHMER-KLEIN Rachel Karchmer-Klein is an associate professor in the School of Education at the University of Delaware where she teaches courses in literacy and educational technology at the undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral levels. She is a former elementary classroom teacher and reading specialist. Her research investigates relationships among literacy skills, digital tools, and teacher preparation, with particular emphasis on technology-infused instructional design. To speak with Karchmer-Klein further about AI in literacy education, critical evaluation of AI-generated content and teacher preparation in the era of generative AI, reach out to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

2 min

How AI can improve poor leadership writing and boost productivity

Poor written communication from leaders can create the kind of confusion it intended to avoid. University of Delaware career expert Jill Gugino Panté suggests using AI to sharpen emails, clarify expectations and reduce unnecessary calls. Getting through to employees with strong messaging can boost productivity by saving time and reducing unwanted meetings, she says. Panté, director of UD's Lerner Career Services Center, says that good leadership writing should be direct and outcome-driven, with no fluff, and offered the following advice for improvement. ✅ Don’t bury the lead. Start with what decision needs to be made, what action is required, and the deadline. If your writing doesn’t reduce ambiguity, it’s going to add to it. Vague communication can create interpretation gaps which, in turn, can create more meetings. When ownership isn’t defined, decisions aren’t documented, or outcomes aren’t clear, teams default to “Let’s hop on a call.” Meetings then become the fallback for unclear thinking. ✅ Generative AI can be a powerful clarity tool if it’s used intentionally. When used well, it can sharpen your ask and structure communication for action. The key is prompting it to refine your message, not just polish it. Leaders can use prompts like: • “Rewrite this message so the action, owner, deadline, and success metrics are explicitly stated" • “What assumptions or ambiguities exist in this message?” ✅ Good writing can replace unnecessary meetings. If communication is not direct, outcome-driven, and structured for action, it will cost you time somewhere else. Here are some practical actions that leaders can make in their writing: • Start with the Ask - Be explicit about what decision or action is needed. Don’t make people search for it. • Define Outcomes - Clarify deliverables, timelines, budgets and state what success looks like. • Clarify Ownership - Identify who is responsible for the request. • Document Decisions - Write down what has been decided and reiterate next steps, owners, and deadlines. To connect with Panté directly and arrange an interview, visit her profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested media can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

View all posts
Powered by