Featured Post from University of Florida

Violence alters human genomes for generations, researchers discover

Dec 5, 2025

4 min

In February of 1982, the Syrian government besieged the city of Hama, killing tens of thousands of its own citizens in sectarian violence. Four decades later, rebels used the memory of the massacre to help inspire the toppling of the Assad family that had overseen the operation.

But there is another lasting effect of the attack, hidden deep in the genes of Syrian families. The grandchildren of women who were pregnant during the siege — grandchildren who never experienced such violence themselves — nonetheless bear marks of it in their genomes. Passed down through their mothers, this genetic imprint offers the first human evidence of a phenomenon previously documented only in animal models. The genetic transmission of stress across multiple generations.

“The idea that trauma and violence can have repercussions into future generations should help people be more empathetic, help policymakers pay more attention to the problem of violence,” said Connie Mulligan, Ph.D., a professor of Anthropology and the Genetics Institute at the University of Florida and co-senior author of the new study. “It could even help explain some of the seemingly unbreakable intergenerational cycles of abuse and poverty and trauma that we see around the world, including in the U.S.”

While our genes are not changed by life experiences, they can be tuned through a system known as epigenetics. In response to stress or other events, our cells can add small chemical flags to genes that may quiet them down or alter their behavior. These changes may help us adapt to stressful environments, although the effects aren’t well understood.

It is these tell-tale chemical flags that Mulligan and her team were looking for in the genes of Syrian families. While lab experiments have shown that animals can pass along epigenetic signatures of stress to future generations, proving the same in people has been nearly impossible.

“Resilience and perseverance is quite possibly a uniquely human trait.” —Connie Mulligan

Mulligan worked with Rana Dajani, Ph.D., a molecular biologist at Hashemite University in Jordan and co-senior author, as well as anthropologist Catherine Panter-Brick, Ph.D., of Yale University, to conduct the unique study. Dajani envisioned the research project; because of her intimate knowledge of the Syrian population and its tragic history, she designed the study to cover three generations of Syrian refugees to Jordan. Some families had lived through the Hama attack before fleeing to Jordan. Other families avoided Hama, but lived through the recent civil war against the Assad regime.

The team collected samples from grandmothers and mothers who were pregnant during the two conflicts, as well as from their children. This study design meant there were grandmothers, mothers and children who had each experienced violence at different stages of development.

A third group of families had immigrated to Jordan before 1980, avoiding the decades of violence in Syria. These early immigrants served as a crucial control to compare to the families who had experienced the stress of civil war.

Study coauthor Dima Hamadmad, a Syrian researcher and the daughter of refugees, led the search for families that met the study criteria and collected cheek swabs from 138 people across 48 families. "The participants took part in the research out of love for their children and concern for future generations,” she said. “But more than that, they wanted their stories of trauma to be heard and acknowledged.”

Back in Florida, Mulligan’s lab scanned the DNA for epigenetic modifications and looked for any relationship with the families’ experience of violence.

In the grandchildren of Hama survivors, the researchers discovered 14 areas in the genome that had been modified in response to the violence their grandmothers experienced. These 14 modifications demonstrate that stress-induced epigenetic changes may indeed appear in future generations in humans, just as they can in animals.

The study also uncovered 21 epigenetic sites in the genomes of people who had directly experienced violence in Syria. In a third finding, the researchers reported that people exposed to violence while in their mothers’ wombs showed evidence of accelerated epigenetic aging, a type of biological aging that may be associated with susceptibility to age-related diseases.

Most of these epigenetic changes showed the same pattern after exposure to violence, suggesting a kind of common epigenetic response to stress – one that can not only affect people directly exposed to stress, but also future generations.

“We think our work is relevant to many forms of violence, not just refugees. Domestic violence, sexual violence, gun violence: all the different kinds of violence we have in the U.S,” said Mulligan. “We should study the effects of violence. We should take it more seriously.”

It’s not clear what, if any, effect these epigenetic changes have in the lives of people carrying them inside their genomes. But some studies have found a link between stress-induced epigenetic changes and diseases like diabetes. One famous study of Dutch survivors of famine during World War II suggested that their offspring carried epigenetic changes that increased their odds of being overweight later in life. While many of these modifications likely have no effect, It’s possible that some have functional effects that can affect our health, Mulligan said.

The researchers published their findings, which were supported by the National Science Foundation, Feb. 27 in the journal Scientific Reports.

While carefully searching for evidence of the lasting effects of war and trauma stamped into our genomes, Mulligan and her collaborators were also struck by the perseverance of the families they worked with. Their story was much bigger than merely surviving war, Mulligan said.

“In the midst of all this violence we can still celebrate their extraordinary resilience. They have persevered,” Mulligan said. “That resilience and perseverance is quite possibly a uniquely human trait.”

Find Experts

Apr 12, 2026

3 min

Study finds most cancer patients exposed to misinformation; UF researchers pilot 'information prescription'

Ninety-three percent of patients with a new cancer diagnosis were exposed to at least one type of misinformation about cancer treatments, a UF Health Cancer Center study has found. Most patients encountered the misinformation — defined as unproven or disproven cancer treatments and myths or misconceptions — even when they weren’t looking for it. The findings have major implications for cancer treatment decision-making. Specifically, doctors should assume the patient has seen or heard misinformation. “Clinicians should assume when their patients are coming to them for a treatment discussion that they have been exposed to different types of information about cancer treatment, whether or not they went online and looked it up themselves,” said senior author Carma Bylund, Ph.D., a professor and associate chair of education in the UF Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics. “One way or another, people are being exposed to a lot of misinformation.” Working with oncologists, Bylund and study first author Naomi Parker, Ph.D., an assistant scientist in the UF Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, are piloting an “information prescription” to steer patients to sources of evidence-based information like the American Cancer Society. The study paves the way for other similar strategies. Most notably, the study found the most common way patients were exposed to misinformation was second hand. “Your algorithms pick up on your diagnosis, your friends and family pick up on it, and then you’re on Facebook and you become exposed to this media,” Parker said. “You’re not necessarily seeking out if vitamin C may be a cure for cancer, but you start being fed that content.” And no, vitamin C does not cure cancer. Health misinformation can prevent people from getting treatment that has evidence behind it, negatively affect relationships between patients and physicians, and increase the risk of death, research has shown. People with cancer are particularly vulnerable to misinformation because of the anxiety and fear that comes with a serious diagnosis, not to mention the overwhelming amount of new information they have to suddenly absorb. While past research has studied misinformation by going directly to the source — for instance, studying what percentage of content on a platform like TikTok is nonsense — little research has looked at its prevalence or how it affects people. The team first developed a way to identify the percentage of cancer patients exposed to misinformation. UF researchers collaborated with Skyler Johnson, M.D., at Huntsman Cancer Institute, an internationally known researcher in the field. The survey questions were based on five categories of unproven or disproven cancer treatments — vitamins and minerals, herbs and supplements, special diets, mind-body interventions and miscellaneous treatments — and treatment misconceptions. The myths and misconceptions were adapted from National Cancer Institute materials and included statements like “Will eating sugar make my cancer worse?” The team surveyed 110 UF Health patients diagnosed with prostate, breast, colorectal or lung cancer within the past six months, a time when patients typically make initial treatment decisions. Most had heard of a potential cancer treatment beyond the standard of care, and most reported they had heard of at least one myth or misconception. The most common sources were close friends or family and websites, distant friends/associates or relatives, social media and news media. The findings mark a shift in misinformation research, with major implications for the doctor-patient relationship, said Bylund, a member of the Cancer Control and Population Sciences research program at the UF Health Cancer Center. “I still think media and the internet are the source and why misinformation can spread so rapidly, but it might come to a cancer patient interpersonally, from family or friends,” she said. Most patients rarely discussed the potential cancer treatments they had heard about with an oncologist, the study also found. Next, the researchers plan to survey a wider pool of patients, then study the outcomes of interventions designed to decrease misinformation exposure, like the information prescription.

Apr 9, 2026

2 min

New AI tool matches students with high-impact internships

Finding the right internship can be an important step for students, but it’s not always clear which opportunities will lead to the strongest growth. To help solve that problem, University of Florida researchers have developed an AI-powered tool that helps students identify internships most likely to accelerate their technical and professional development. Unlike traditional recommendation engines, Pro-CaRE not only predicts which opportunities will lead to stronger outcomes, it also explains why each suggestion is a good fit. In testing data collected from the students, Pro-CaRE’s predictions proved highly accurate, accounting for more than 72% of the differences in learning gains among participants. While the pilot is being tested in engineering, the tool could be adopted for other disciplines. “Internships are one of the most critical parts of an engineering education, but students often struggle to know which experiences will actually help them grow,” said Jinnie Shin, assistant professor of research and evaluation methodology in the UF College of Education. “What makes Pro-CaRE unique is that it doesn’t just offer a list of options. It provides personalized recommendations backed by data and it tells students clearly why an opportunity is a good match for them.” Pro-CaRE creates matches by analyzing each student’s coursework, major, background and self-reported interest, confidence and self-efficacy in engineering skills. It then compares that profile with a carefully chosen set of similar peers to refine suggestions. The result is more precise guidance that adapts to students at different stages of their degree programs. “Students shouldn’t have to guess or hope that an internship will be worthwhile,” Shin said. “With Pro-CaRE, they can approach opportunities knowing they’re backed by evidence, whether the role is onsite, hybrid or remote and whether it’s at a startup or a Fortune 500 company.” The system is designed to work across a wide range of companies and contexts, giving students flexibility while ensuring their choices align with their personal and professional goals. Each recommendation comes with a clear “why this?” explanation, so students can make confident decisions and discuss options more effectively with advisors. Pro-CaRE was developed by a cross-disciplinary UF team combining expertise in education and engineering. Alongside Shin, the project’s co-principal investigators include Kent Crippen in the College of Education and Bruce Carroll in the Herbert Wertheim College of Engineering. The team is exploring external funding opportunities to expand the usage and test the efficacy on a larger scale. “Ultimately, our goal is to empower students to invest their time in experiences that will have the greatest impact,” Shin said. “Pro-CaRE bridges the gap between what students hope to gain and what internships can truly deliver.”

Apr 7, 2026

2 min

Using AI tools empowers and burdens users in online Q&A communities

Whether you’ve searched for cooking tips on Reddit, troubleshooted tech problems on community forums or asked questions on platforms like Quora, you’ve benefited from online help communities. These digital spaces rely on people across the world to contribute their knowledge for free, and have become an essential tool for solving problems and learning new skills. New research reveals that generative artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT are creating a double-edge effect on users in these communities, simultaneously making them more helpful while potentially overwhelming them to the point of decreasing their responses. “On the positive side, AI helps users learn to write more organized and readable answers, leading to a noticeable increase in the number of responses,” explained Liangfei Qiu, Ph.D., study coauthor and PricewaterhouseCoopers Professor at the University of Florida Warrington College of Business. “However, when users rely too heavily on AI, the mental effort required to process and refine AI outputs can actually reduce participation. In other words, AI both empowers and burdens contributors: it enables more engagement and better readability, but too much reliance can slow people down.” The study examined Stack Overflow, one of the world’s largest question-and-answer coding platforms for computer programmers, to investigate the impact of generative AI on both the quality and quantity of user contributions. Qiu and his coauthor Guohou Shan of Northeastern University’s D’Amore-McKim School of Business measured the impact of AI on users’ number of answers generated per day, answer length and readability. Specifically, they found that users who used AI tools to generate their responses contributed almost 17% more answers per day compared to those who didn’t use AI. The answers generated with AI were both shorter by about 23% and easier to read. However, when people relied too heavily on AI tools, their participation decreased. Qiu and Shan noted that the additional cognitive burden associated with heavier AI usage negatively affected the impact on a user’s answer quality. For online help communities grappling with AI policies, this research provides valuable insight into how these policies can be updated in the current AI environment. While some communities, like Stack Overflow, have banned AI tools, this research suggests that a more nuanced approach could be a better solution. Instead of banning AI entirely, the researchers suggest striking a balance between allowing AI usage while promoting responsible and moderated use. This approach, they argue, would enable users to benefit from efficiency and learning opportunities, while not compromising quality content and user cognition. “For platform leaders, the takeaway is clear: AI can boost participation if thoughtfully integrated, but its cognitive demands must be managed to sustain long-term user contributions,” Qiu said.