Featured Post from University of Florida

Beyond the field: New research highlights how NIL is reshaping college athlete identity

Feb 22, 2026

4 min

In an era of name, image and likeness, or NIL, many college athletes are thinking differently about who they are — seeing themselves not just as competitors or students, but also as influencers with distinct voices and causes, according to a new study from the University of Florida.

Molly Harry, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the Department of Sport Management at the UF College of Health and Human Performance, surveyed 200 athletes from 21 Power Four universities to better understand how NIL, which refers to the rights of college athletes to earn money through endorsements, sponsorships, social media promotions and other commercial opportunities, has impacted the way athletes perceive their roles and identities.

“Historically, we’ve viewed them (college athletes) through the lens of athletics or academics, but they’re daughters, brothers, role models, and increasingly, they’re now cultivating public personas and marketing skills.” —Molly Harry, Ph.D., an assistant professor in the Department of Sport Management

The findings, published Friday in the Sociology of Sport Journal, reveal a growing recognition among athletes that they are more than the two-dimensional “student-athlete” model that is traditionally used in research and policy.

“With the shift in NIL policies, athletes are starting to develop roles and identities related to that of the influencer,” Harry said. “Historically, we’ve viewed them through the lens of athletics or academics, but they’re daughters, brothers, role models, and increasingly, they’re now cultivating public personas and marketing skills.”

Through survey responses across seven major sports — football, baseball, men’s and women’s basketball, gymnastics, volleyball and softball — Harry and UF doctoral student Hannah Kloetzer examined athletes' engagement with NIL opportunities, as well as the personal sacrifices they made to pursue them. They found that many athletes now view NIL as a platform to promote causes they care about, build connections with their communities and explore career pathways after college.

One softball player described the value of NIL in a way that highlights the broader impact: “It’s been great to feel seen and have your hard work in a sport help in other parts of life. It’s really nice to use NIL on a resume as marketing experience.”

Athletes surveyed said they found deals not just with big-name brands, but more often with local businesses like restaurants, boutiques and community partners. This entrepreneurial approach often required initiative and personal outreach, something many athletes had to learn on their own.

“Some athletes told us they felt lost when trying to navigate NIL,” Harry said. “Others shared how they reached out to local businesses or organized their own camps.”

One particularly striking finding, Harry said, was that some athletes were making athletic sacrifices — like spending less time training — to pursue NIL work, a shift that underscores the importance of these opportunities. Harry stressed that while no one reported skipping practices, athletes did acknowledge shifting their priorities to make room for NIL-related endeavors.

“If you’re willing to give up something in your athletic routine, that speaks volumes about how central NIL — and influencer identities — could become for some athletes,” she said.

Another key insight: football players of color from low socioeconomic backgrounds were most likely to self-identify as influencers. This emerging pattern stands in contrast to perceived broader trends in the social media world.

“That was one of the most fascinating takeaways,” Harry said. “We have this unique subset of influencers — college football athletes — that are starting to enter this space.”

Harry’s research builds on a growing conversation in the academic community about the evolving identity of college athletes. A few conceptual pieces have previously proposed the idea of a “student-athlete-influencer,” but Harry’s team is one of the first to gather empirical data to back it up.

This new perspective has broad implications for how universities and organizations like the NCAA support college athletes, both during their playing years and as they prepare for life after sport.

“As fans, we often see athletes as commodities on the field,” Harry said. “But they’re humans first, and they’re starting to recognize their own value and tap into their potential beyond the playing field.”

In addition to academic and athletic support, Harry believes universities should invest in more targeted resources tailored to influencer pressures, like mentorship opportunities and training that goes beyond basic social media etiquette.

“Athletes who take on influencer roles may deal with unique stressors, whether it’s comparing engagement numbers or coping with public scrutiny,” she said. “It would be valuable to provide opportunities where athlete-influencers can support each other, share strategies and protect their mental health.”

A football player who participated in the study summed up the broader potential of NIL: “I’m very appreciative of NIL opportunities and the ability to continue to grow my camp and greater brand outside of my football program.”

Looking ahead, Harry plans to explore this evolving identity through more qualitative research, with a focus on what it truly means to be an “influencer” in the context of college athletics.

“Athletes are more than football players. They are more than swimmers,” she said. “They are people who we walk with on our college campuses, and they are people who bring value to our society in a host of ways.”

Connect with:

Molly Harry

Assistant Professor

Molly Harry research focuses on college athletes' rights and wellbeing with a particular recent focus on NIL.

Sport sociologyTitle IX and Gender EquityCollege Athlete RightsName, Image, and LikenessNIL

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.