Featured Post from University of Delaware

New survey shows lack of public trust in Musk, DOGE

Mar 21, 2025

2 min

Dannagal Young
CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


New data from the Center for Political Communication (CPC) at the University of Delaware shows many Americans have little trust in either Elon Musk or the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In a nationally-representative sample of 1,600 adult Americans surveyed by YouGov between February 27 and March 5, 2025, CPC researchers asked how much trust respondents had in various people and institutions, including Elon Musk, the Department of Government Efficiency, and President Trump.


Among the key findings:


• 25% of Americans report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Elon Musk

26% report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

• 33% report having “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in President Donald Trump.

• About half of Republicans report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in either (compared to 70% of Republicans who report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in President Trump).

• Among independent voters, only 11% report “a lot” or “a great deal” of trust in Musk and 13% in DOGE.


“As constituents in Republican districts learn about and voice concerns about DOGE’s cuts to Veteran’s Affairs, The National Institutes of Health, National Parks, and the Federal Aviation Administration, it will be interesting to see how public trust in Musk and DOGE may be affected,” said Dr. Dannagal Young, Director of the Center for Political Communication and one of the authors of the survey. “Understanding public sentiment about these unique government entities is essential to help ensure that elected officials are responsive to voter concerns."


Visit the CPC's website for full results of the survey.


To connect with Young for an interview, visit her profile and click the contact button.

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

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
Powered by