The Handshake Seen 'Round The World

Sep 11, 2024

2 min

David Redlawsk


More than 50 million viewers were expecting a cold standoff to start last night's debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump. University of Delaware experts say Trump was likely more shocked than they were when Harris walked to his podium for a cordial handshake.


"It was a clearly planned move on Harris' part intending to assert some dominance over someone whose entire schtick is about being dominant. And it was successful, and I think it discomforted Trump," said David Redlawsk, professor of political science and international relations.


Erin Cassese, professor of political science and international relations, said the move exuded confidence, especially given that President Biden and former-President Trump did not shake hands at the outset of their July debate.


"Harris’s pursuit of the handshake showed off the bat that she would engage in this debate on her own terms, Cassese said. "It also had Trump on the back foot, as he seemed not to expect the gesture."


Cassese said the handshake also offset any advantage Trump might have gained due to the podium setup, which could have highlighted their height differential.


"But the handshake showed that Harris was not intimidated by the difference in stature," Cassese said.


Redlawsk is a political psychologist who studies voter behavior and emotion, focusing on how voters process political information to make their decisions. He has written several books on politics, worked behind the scenes on campaigns and ran for local office.


Cassese explores the behavior of women as voters and candidates for political office in the United States. Her areas of expertise are gender, abortion, public opinion, campaigns and elections.


To set up an interview either either expert, reporters can visit their ExpertFile pages and clicking on the "contact" button.


Connect with:
David Redlawsk

David Redlawsk

Professor and Chair, Political Science Political Science and International Relations

Prof. Redlawsk is a political psychologist with expertise in campaigns, voter behavior, decision making, and emotion.

Political CampaignsDecision MakingSurvey ResearchPoliticsVoter Beavior and Attitudes
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Delaware

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.

1 min

Epidemiologist: Winter Olympics fortunate to dodge norovirus outbreak

Finland's Olympic women's hockey team overcame a norovirus scare last week, but they couldn't get past Team USA, who shut them out 5-0 Saturday in Milan. The University of Delaware's Jennifer Horney can discuss the difficult-to-contain virus, which also hit the Winter Games in 2018. - Horney, a professor of epidemiology at UD, said that the outbreak –  which forced Finland to cancel its first game after 13 players had either been infected or quarantined – is not surprising. Norovirus spreads rapidly in crowded environments through direct contact with surfaces or airborne droplets. - It is difficult to limit the spread of norovirus, as witnessed by the major outbreak that spread at the 2018 Winter Olympics in South Korea. - Consideration is often given for the potential of these types of outbreaks being intentional, which requires public health to work closely with law enforcement. To reach Horney directly and arrange an interview, visit her profile and click on the "contact" button. Interested journalists can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

View all posts