Our Spotlights

Male “ghost sharks” — eerie deep-sea fish known as chimaeras that are related to sharks and rays — have a strange rod jutting from their foreheads, studded with sharp, retractable teeth. New research reveals these are not merely lookalikes, but real rows of teeth that grow outside the mouth. What’s more, the toothy appendage is likely used for mating. Found only in males, the forehead rod — called a tenaculum — is the ghost sharks’ only source of distinct teeth, and it seems to be used to grasp females in much the same way sharks use their toothy mouths in mating. “If these strange chimaeras are sticking teeth on the front of their head, it makes you think about the dynamism of tooth development more generally,” said Gareth Fraser, Ph.D., a professor of biology at the University of Florida and senior author of the study. “If chimaeras can make a set of teeth outside the mouth, where else might we find teeth?” The team, including scientists from the University of Washington and the University of Chicago, studied both fossils and living specimens to solve the mystery. A 315-million-year-old fossil showed the tenaculum attached to the upper jaw, bearing teeth incredibly similar to those in the mouth. Modern chimaeras collected from Puget Sound revealed the same tooth-growing process on the head, seen in modern-day shark jaws. And genetic testing confirmed they expressed the same tooth-specific genes as oral teeth. “What we found is that the teeth on this strange appendage look very much like rows of shark teeth. The ability to make teeth transferred onto that appendage, likely from the mouth,” Fraser said. “Over time, the tenaculum shortened but retained the ability to make oral teeth on this forehead appendage.” Fraser collaborated with Washington’s Karly Cohen, Ph.D., and Michael Coates, Ph.D., from Chicago on the study, which was published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. As experts in shark evolution and anatomy, the scientists were intrigued by these tooth-filled rods sprouting from the ghost shark foreheads. The central mystery: Is the tenaculum covered in true teeth related to oral teeth or more similar to the tooth-like scales plastering the skin of sharks and some ghost sharks? CT scans of the fossils and modern chimaeras gave the scientists unprecedented, detailed insights into the development of the tenaculum teeth, which looked remarkably similar to the teeth of today’s sharks. The nail in the coffin came from genetic evidence. The tenaculum teeth express genes found only in true teeth, never in shark skin denticles. "What I think is very neat about this project is that it provides a beautiful example of evolutionary tinkering or ‘bricolage,’” said Coates, a professor of biology at the University of Chicago. “We have a combination of experimental data with paleontological evidence to show how these fishes co-opted a preexisting program for manufacturing teeth to make a new device that is essential for reproduction." Cohen, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Washington’s Friday Harbor Labs and first author of the paper, said scientists had never spotted teeth outside the mouth in this way before. “The tenaculum is a developmental relic, not a bizarre one-off, and the first clear example of a toothed structure outside the jaw,” she said. The bizarre path from a mouth full of teeth to forehead teeth used for mating demonstrates the impressive flexibility of evolution, the researchers say, always ready to repurpose structures for strange and unexpected new uses. “There are still plenty of surprises down in the ocean depths that we have yet to uncover,” Fraser said.

One year after his pioneering flight aboard Blue Origin’s New Shepard rocket, University of Florida space biologist Rob Ferl, Ph.D., is still processing what it meant — not just for his career, but for science itself. “What stands out the most is just the overwhelming gratitude,” Ferl said. “It was such an amazing opportunity for a scientist to go to space and actually do science.” Ferl, a professor in UF’s Horticultural Sciences Department, Director of the Astraeus Space Institute, and Assistant Vice President of Research, became one of the first space biologists to fly alongside his own experiment — a moment that marked a new era in researcher-led missions. His suborbital journey provided a rare opportunity to study how terrestrial biology responds to the very first moments of spaceflight. “For decades, space biology has relied on professional astronauts to carry out experiments designed by scientists on Earth,” Ferl explained. “But to truly understand how biology works in space, I believe you - as the scientist - have to be there. You have to feel the environment.” This September, Ferl and longtime collaborator Anna-Lisa Paul, Ph.D., will be back at Blue Origin’s West Texas launch site, continuing their work with a new series of plant experiments. Ferl and Paul, who directs UF’s Interdisciplinary Center for Biotechnology Research and is a professor in Horticultural Sciences, are tracking fluorescently tagged genes in Arabidopsis plants to study how gene expression changes during the rapid shift from Earth’s gravity to the microgravity of spaceflight and back again. It’s a full-circle moment for Ferl, who remains deeply engaged in the same questions that sent him to space a year ago. Unpacking the Transition from Earth to Space Ferl’s experiment focused on the early metabolic responses of plants during the critical transition from Earth’s gravity to the weightlessness of space. “The scientific community has accumulated plenty of data comparing biology in orbit with that on Earth,” he said. “But we’ve known almost nothing about what happens in those first few minutes as organisms enter space and are exposed to microgravity.” Initial results from the flight reveal intense metabolic changes in the early moments of spaceflight. These changes are distinct from, but connected to, the long-term adaptations seen in orbit. Early Findings, Future Impact While the data from Ferl’s experiment are still on the way to being published, the findings are already shaping the direction of ongoing research. The work contributes to a growing understanding of how terrestrial life, from plants to humans, shares fundamental pathways in responding to the space environment. “This has real implications for the future of space missions,” Ferl noted. “As we send more people and more biology into space in support of exploration, we need a comprehensive understanding of how living systems adapt — right from the start.” Ferl and his team will return to Blue Origin’s launch site in Texas in September to continue their research, sending an uncrewed payload of plants into suborbital space. The flight carries no humans—but it does carry an automated experiment designed to advance their understanding of plant biology in space. It’s part of a broader effort to refine what Ferl calls “researcher-tended missions.” A New Course for UF Space Science The mission has not only shaped the trajectory of Ferl’s research, it has also energized Astraeus and the university’s space biology efforts. “This is about building a new kind of science culture,” Ferl said. “One where the scientists are embedded in every part of the mission, from experiment design to the moment of launch.” As the one-year anniversary of his flight approaches, Ferl remains focused on pushing the boundaries of what science in space can be. But he hasn’t forgotten the magnitude of the moment. “Even a year later,” he said, “the most powerful thing I feel is just: thank you. Thank you for the chance to go, to see it for myself, and to bring that knowledge back to Earth.”

For more than 25 years, Holly Lane, Ph.D., has been laser-focused on a global educational goal: to ensure that students worldwide have access to information about reading. Her passion project, known as the University of Florida Literacy Institute, or UFLI, has already improved the literacy skills of more than 10 million children. What began as a modest classroom tool now has a Facebook community of over 273,000 members; 18 million online toolbox views; and more than 500,000 instructional manuals in classrooms. And as the UFLI brand gains traction, Lane continues to champion what the acronym means and why the program has been so life-changing. “When you learn to read, you fly,” said Lane, who serves as the UFLI director and a professor of special education at UF. UFLI is an ongoing effort by UF faculty and students to improve literacy outcomes for struggling students by addressing two key areas: reader development and teacher development. The program began in 1998 as a tutoring model for beginning readers working with Lane’s pre-service teachers. The idea was that, if teachers understood how to employ effective, evidence-based practices in a one-on-one tutoring session, they could transfer those skills to their small-group or classroom instruction. However, some teachers struggled to make that transition, so a dedicated small-group lesson model was created. That foundation eventually expanded into a dyslexia support program and caught the attention of a surprising partner, best-selling author and philanthropist James Patterson. Known worldwide for his literacy advocacy and generous support of reading initiatives, Patterson has become a key benefactor for the program. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, a challenge turned into a breakthrough. UFLI started its Virtual Teaching Resource Hub and, in the first week, about 70,000 teachers visited the site and downloaded materials. The turning point came when a school in St. Augustine reached out to UFLI, asking for professional development. “I said, ‘Well, what if we planned the lessons for you instead of teaching you how to plan these lessons?’” Lane said. What followed was what Lane called her “accidental phonics program.” “They ended the year with the best scores they'd ever seen, better than their pre-COVID scores, and that was unheard of,” Lane said. That success led to an effective district-wide pilot in Alachua County with 21 elementary schools. UFLI leaders decided to publish the contents of the program and create a manual that individual teachers could purchase. This concept boomed, and the program even made waves overseas. “Starting with the virtual teaching hub… we had a huge following in Perth and in Melbourne, and now we have an Australian edition of the manual,” Lane said. “We’ve been in every state and every Canadian province and territory, but we're also now in something like 60-some other countries.” Patterson has continued his support by directing efforts toward expanding UFLI’s reach in Florida, aiming to bring the program to every district in the state. Looking ahead, Lane is especially excited about UFLI’s new technology. “We're calling it our assessment and planning portal,” Lane said. “Teachers assess two skills a week, and they enter their data into this program and it spits out small-group lesson plans for the following week that target specific needs of their students.” The data input system is highly advanced, requiring the teacher to simply hold up work in front of a webcam, and the system then reads the student handwriting and imports the data. The program’s structure also ensures that students apply new concepts daily and revisit them regularly. But behind it all is a deeply connected community. For Lane, the success of UFLI boils down to people. “We have an amazing team here,” Lane said. “If anything, that's my superpower, finding really good people who are really good humans but also really good at what they do.” For more information about UFLI, visit ufli.education.ufl.edu.

You’ve probably heard it before in a meeting: “Let’s touch base offline to align our bandwidth on this workflow.” Corporate jargon like this is easy to laugh at — but its negative impact in the office can be serious. According to a new study, using too much jargon in the workplace can hurt employees’ ability to process messages, leading them to experience negative feelings and making them feel less confident. In turn, they’re less likely to reach out and ask for or share information with their colleagues. “You need people to be willing to collaborate, share ideas and look for more information if they don't understand something at work,” said Olivia Bullock, Ph.D., an assistant professor of advertising at the University of Florida and co-author of the new study. “And jargon might actually be impeding that information flow across teams.” Age made a difference, though. Older workers had a harder time processing jargon, but were more likely to intend to ask for more information to clarify the message. Younger employees were less likely to seek and share information when confused by jargon. “It gives credence to the idea that younger people are more vulnerable to these workplace dynamics,” Bullock said. “If you're onboarding younger employees, explain everything clearly.” Bullock and her co-author, Tiffany Bisbey, Ph.D., an assistant professor at George Washington University, published their findings Aug. 25 in the International Journal of Business Communication. An expert in communication research, Bullock has long studied jargon’s negative effects for talking about health and science. Then, faced with jargon in her own work, she started to ask how these arcane, technical words might get in the way of a smooth workplace. To find out, Bullock surveyed nearly 2,000 people who were told to imagine they had just started a new job and received an email with important directions. Half had to navigate a jargon-filled message about “intranets” and “EFT” payments. The other half had that jargon translated back into plainer language. The message packed with jargon, not surprisingly, made it harder for people to process the information, which can throw off an entire workday. “It doesn't just make them feel bad about the information they've been given. It makes them feel bad about themselves,” Bullock said. The study then asked people how they would respond to the jargon. The impenetrable language made them feel insecure and less likely to ask for help right when they needed it the most. “They weren’t as willing to collaborate,” Bullock said. “If you can’t ask for more information or share that information downstream, you’re creating silos, and that’s disrupting your workflow and environment.” Having studied jargon for so long, Bullock has one piece of advice for employers and employees alike. “Always reduce jargon,” she said. “The benefit of using jargon doesn’t outweigh the cost.”

As Floridians brace for hurricanes amid the wild weather of 2025, some University of Florida researchers have their eyes on 2017’s Hurricane Maria, the deadly Category 4 storm that pummeled Puerto Rico. Engineering professor and natural hazards researcher Brian Phillips, Ph.D., is leading UF’s efforts in a Hurricane Maria investigation conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, known as NIST. The goal is increased safety and resilience amid deadly conditions. Maria killed nearly 3,000 people and caused more than $90 billion in damage. Most of the island’s wind sensors and weather stations failed as the storm raged, leaving responders and investigators with few reliable weather measurements. What went wrong? Phillips and UF storm researchers are helping answer that question — and provide safety and structural recommendations — as part of NIST’s Hurricane Maria investigation. The full report will be released in 2026, but NIST recently published preliminary findings; some of the hazard and structural load data was derived from wind tunnel tests at UF's NHERI Experimental Facility in the Powell Family Structure and Materials Laboratory on UF’s East Campus in Gainesville. “Our wind tunnel has a strong reputation in the wind-engineering community for its unique flow control and measurement capabilities We worked with NIST to develop a test campaign to study the wind conditions Puerto Rico’s mountainous terrain and the resulting loads of critical infrastructure,” said Phillips, a civil and coastal engineering professor with UF’s Engineering School of Sustainable Infrastructure & Environment. “UF,” he added, “has one of the premier research wind tunnels in the country and it enables us to pursue impactful research like this.” As part of the NIST investigation, Phillips and his team created 1-to-3100 scale topographic models of regions in Puerto Rico — about 12 kilometers shrunk down to four meters, Phillips said. They set up those models in the wind tunnel and replicated wind flow over the topography. “These initial tests were designed to understand the influence of the complex topography had on the wind,” Phillips said. Flow was measured using velocity probes and particle image velocimetry (PIV). These topographic model tests were followed by 1-to-100 scale tests on models of two hospitals in Puerto Rico. In addition to surface pressure measurements, the team conducted qualitative flow visualization tests using smoke, lasers, and high-speed cameras. “The capabilities of the UF wind tunnel enabled us to investigate the hurricane winds at two different scales,” said NIST’s lead Hurricane Maria investigator, Joseph Main, “so we could measure how the winds were accelerated by Puerto Rico’s mountainous topography and then how those winds translated into loads on critical buildings.” Maria’s flooding blocked roads to hospitals and shelters. The hospitals themselves were heavily damaged by the storm, NIST reported. Reduced access to healthcare was a major factor in the death toll. “It's good to take a step back,” Phillips said about the overall investigation. “Researchers are approaching the disaster from multiple angles, including the better understanding of the hazard, the performance of critical infrastructure, public response and recovery. “This holistic approach is needed to capture the complete picture and maximize what we can learn from the event. UF's primary contribution was understanding the hurricane wind field and the resulting structural loads, which is a critical piece of that puzzle.” In finding infrastructure vulnerabilities, researchers contend the goal is integrating their findings into design standards for Puerto Rico’s unique topography and building codes. The findings also could be valuable to other storm-prone regions with complex topography. NIST launched the investigation in 2018, noting Hurricane Maria “set off a cascade of building and infrastructure failures across Puerto Rico that had lasting impacts on society, including health care, business and education.” “Our goal is to learn from that event to recommend improvements to building codes, standards and practices that will make communities more resilient to hurricanes and other hazards, not just in Puerto Rico but across the United States,” Main said. The complete report is scheduled to be released in 2026, and NIST noted some findings may change before its release. But in July, NIST released some preliminary findings. They include: Peak wind speeds over flat terrain reached 140 mph. They accelerated to over 200 mph in some areas due to the steep hills and mountains. The mountains also intensified the rainfall, which reached 30 inches in some areas. Only three out of 22 weather stations were fully functional during the hurricane. 95.3% of schools on the island lost power for an average of over 100 days. “One important preliminary finding from the study is that emergency preparations work,” NIST reported. “Businesses, schools and hospitals that took specific measures to prepare before Hurricane Maria were able to resume operations more quickly” said Maria Dillard, NIST’s associate lead Hurricane Maria investigator. Preparations included pre-established emergency plans, designated risk mitigation funds and backup power sources.

A sweeping new study from the University of Florida and University College London has found that daily reading for pleasure in the United States has declined by more than 40% over the last 20 years — raising urgent questions about the cultural, educational and health consequences of a nation reading less. Published today in the journal iScience, the study analyzed data from over 236,000 Americans who participated in the American Time Use Survey between 2003 and 2023. The findings suggest a fundamental cultural shift: fewer people are carving out time in their day to read for enjoyment. “This is not just a small dip — it’s a sustained, steady decline of about 3% per year,” said Jill Sonke, Ph.D., director of research initiatives at the UF Center for Arts in Medicine and co-director of the EpiArts Lab, a National Endowment for the Arts research lab at UF in partnership with University College London. “It’s significant, and it’s deeply concerning.” Who’s reading and who isn’t The decline wasn’t evenly spread across the population. Researchers found steeper drops among Black Americans than white Americans, people with lower income or educational attainment, and those in rural (versus metropolitan) areas — highlighting deepening disparities in reading access and habits. “While people with higher education levels and women are still more likely to read, even among these groups, we’re seeing shifts,” said Jessica Bone, Ph.D., senior research fellow in statistics and epidemiology at University College London. “And among those who do read, the time spent reading has increased slightly, which may suggest a polarization, where some people are reading more while many have stopped reading altogether.” The researchers also noted some more promising findings, including that reading with children did not change over the last 20 years. However, reading with children was a lot less common than reading for pleasure, which is concerning given that this activity is tied to early literacy development, academic success and family bonding, Bone said. Why it matters Reading for pleasure has long been recognized not just as a tool for education, but as a means of supporting mental health, empathy, creativity and lifelong learning. The EpiArts Lab, which uses large data sets to examine links between the arts and health, has previously identified clear associations between creative engagement and well-being. “Reading has historically been a low-barrier, high-impact way to engage creatively and improve quality of life,” Sonke said. “When we lose one of the simplest tools in our public health toolkit, it’s a serious loss.” The American Time Use Survey offers a unique window into these trends. “We’re working with incredibly detailed data about how people spend their days,” Bone said. “And because it’s a representative sample of U.S. residents in private households, we can look not just at the national trend, but at how it plays out across different communities.” Why are Americans reading less? While causes were not part of the study, the researchers point to multiple potential factors, including the rise of digital media, growing economic pressures, shrinking leisure time and uneven access to books and libraries. “Our digital culture is certainly part of the story,” Sonke said. “But there are also structural issues — limited access to reading materials, economic insecurity and a national decline in leisure time. If you’re working multiple jobs or dealing with transportation barriers in a rural area, a trip to the library may just not be feasible.” What can be done? The study’s authors say that interventions could help slow or reverse the trend, but they need to be strategic. “Reading with children is one of the most promising avenues,” said Daisy Fancourt, Ph.D., a professor of psychology and epidemiology at University College London and co-director of the EpiArts Lab. “It supports not only language and literacy, but empathy, social bonding, emotional development and school readiness.” Bone added that creating more community-centered reading opportunities could also help: “Ideally, we’d make local libraries more accessible and attractive, encourage book groups, and make reading a more social and supported activity — not just something done in isolation.” The study underscores the importance of valuing and protecting access to the arts — not only as a matter of culture, but as a matter of public health. “Reading has always been one of the more accessible ways to support well-being,” Fancourt said. “To see this kind of decline is concerning because the research is clear: reading is a vital health-enhancing behavior for every group within society, with benefits across the life-course.”

As students return to classrooms, Maya Israel, professor of educational technology and computer science education at the University of Florida, shares insights on best practices for AI use for students in K-12. She also serves as the director of CSEveryone Center for Computer Science Education at UF, a program created to boost teachers’ capabilities around computer science and AI in education. Israel also leads the Florida K-12 Education Task Force, a group committed to empowering educators, students, families and administrators by harnessing the transformative potential of AI in K-12 classrooms, prioritizing safety, privacy, access and fairness. How are K–12 students using AI in classrooms? There is a wide range of approaches that students are using AI in classrooms. It depends on several factors including district policies, student age and the teacher’s instructional goals. Some districts restrict AI to only teacher use, such as creating custom reading passages for younger students. Others allow older students to use tools to check grammar, create visuals or run science simulations. Even then, skilled teachers frame AI as one tool, not a replacement for student thinking and effort. What are examples of age-appropriate tools that enhance learning? AI tools can be used to either enhance or erode learner agency and critical thinking. It is up to the educators to consider how these tools can be used appropriately. It is critical to use AI tools in a manner that supports learning, creativity and problem solving rather than bypass critical thinking. For example, Canva lets students create infographics, posters and videos to show understanding. Google’s Teachable Machine helps students learn AI concepts by training their own image-recognition models. These types of AI-augmented tools work best when they are embedded into activities such as project-based learning, where AI supports learning and critical thinking. How do teachers ensure AI supports core skills? While AI can be incredibly helpful in supporting learning, it should not be a shortcut that allows students to bypass learning. Teachers should design learning opportunities that integrate AI in a manner that encourages critical thinking. For example, if students are using AI to support their mathematical understanding, teachers should ask them to explain their reasoning, engage in discussions and attempt to solve problems in different ways. Teachers can ask students questions like, “Does that answer make sense based on what you know?” or “Why do you think [said AI tool] made that suggestion?” This type of reflection reinforces the message that learning does not happen through getting fast answers. Learning happens through exploration, productive struggle and collaboration. Many parents worry that using AI might make students too dependent on technology. How do educators address that concern? This is a very valid concern. Over-reliance on AI can erode independence and critical thinking, that’s why teachers should be intentional in how they use AI for teaching and learning. Educators can address this concern by communicating with parents their policies and approaches to using AI with students. This approach can include providing clear expectations of when AI is used, designing assignments that require critical thinking, personal reflection and reasoning and teaching students the metacognitive skills to self-assess how and when to use AI so that it is used to support learning rather than as a crutch. How do schools ensure that students still develop original thinking and creativity when using AI for assignments or projects? In the age of AI, there is the need to be even more intentional designing learning experiences where students engage in creative and critical thinking. One of the best practices that have shown to support this is the use of project-based learning, where students must create, iterate and evaluate ideas based on feedback from their peers and teachers. AI can help students gather ideas or organize research, but the students must ask the questions, synthesize information and produce original ideas. Assessment and rubrics should emphasize skills such as reasoning, process and creativity rather than just focusing on the final product. That way, although AI can play a role in instruction, the goal is to design instructional activities that move beyond what the AI can do. How do educators help students understand when it’s appropriate to use AI in their schoolwork? In the age of AI, educators should help students develop the skills to be original thinkers who can use AI thoughtfully and responsibly. Educators can help students understand when to use AI in their school work by directly embedding AI literacy into their instruction. AI literacy includes having discussions about the capabilities and limitations of AI, ethical considerations and the importance of students’ agency and original thoughts. Additionally, clear guidelines and policies help students navigate some of the gray areas of AI usage. What guidance should parents give at home? There are several key messages that parents should give their children about the use of AI. The most important message is that even though AI is powerful, it does not replace their judgement, creativity or empathy. Even though AI can provide fast answers, it is important for students to learn the skills themselves. Another key message is to know the rules about AI in the classroom. Parents should speak with their students about the mental health implications of over-reliance on AI. When students turn to AI-augmented tools for every answer or idea, they can gradually lose confidence in their own problem-solving abilities. Instead, students should learn how to use AI in ways that strengthen their skills and build independence.

With over 75% of professionals using AI in their daily work, writing and editing messages with tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot or Claude has become a commonplace practice. While generative AI tools are seen to make writing easier, are they effective for communicating between managers and employees? A new study of 1,100 professionals reveals a critical paradox in workplace communications: AI tools can make managers’ emails more professional, but regular use can undermine trust between them and their employees. “We see a tension between perceptions of message quality and perceptions of the sender,” said Anthony Coman, Ph.D., a researcher at the University of Florida's Warrington College of Business and study co-author. “Despite positive impressions of professionalism in AI-assisted writing, managers who use AI for routine communication tasks put their trustworthiness at risk when using medium- to high-levels of AI assistance." In the study published in the International Journal of Business Communication, Coman and his co-author, Peter Cardon, Ph.D., of the University of Southern California, surveyed professionals about how they viewed emails that they were told were written with low, medium and high AI assistance. Survey participants were asked to evaluate different AI-written versions of a congratulatory message on both their perception of the message content and their perception of the sender. While AI-assisted writing was generally seen as efficient, effective, and professional, Coman and Cardon found a “perception gap” in messages that were written by managers versus those written by employees. “When people evaluate their own use of AI, they tend to rate their use similarly across low, medium and high levels of assistance,” Coman explained. “However, when rating other’s use, magnitude becomes important. Overall, professionals view their own AI use leniently, yet they are more skeptical of the same levels of assistance when used by supervisors.” While low levels of AI help, like grammar or editing, were generally acceptable, higher levels of assistance triggered negative perceptions. The perception gap is especially significant when employees perceive higher levels of AI writing, bringing into question the authorship, integrity, caring and competency of their manager. The impact on trust was substantial: Only 40% to 52% of employees viewed supervisors as sincere when they used high levels of AI, compared to 83% for low-assistance messages. Similarly, while 95% found low-AI supervisor messages professional, this dropped to 69-73% when supervisors relied heavily on AI tools. The findings reveal employees can often detect AI-generated content and interpret its use as laziness or lack of caring. When supervisors rely heavily on AI for messages like team congratulations or motivational communications, employees perceive them as less sincere and question their leadership abilities. “In some cases, AI-assisted writing can undermine perceptions of traits linked to a supervisor’s trustworthiness,” Coman noted, specifically citing impacts on perceived ability and integrity, both key components of cognitive-based trust. The study suggests managers should carefully consider message type, level of AI assistance and relational context before using AI in their writing. While AI may be appropriate and professionally received for informational or routine communications, like meeting reminders or factual announcements, relationship-oriented messages requiring empathy, praise, congratulations, motivation or personal feedback are better handled with minimal technological intervention.

Ozzy Osbourne was best known for two things: his shape-shifting resilience as a pioneer of heavy metal music and, most recently, his remarkable authenticity during his public journey with Parkinson's disease. Osbourne, who passed away on July 22, possessed a unique ability to connect directly with people who were suffering. He was an honest and transparent voice for what it was like to live with a neurodegenerative disease. He was willing to go where others would not, and he took on the stigma of a Parkinson's diagnosis. Stigma remains one of the most underrecognized yet pervasive challenges in Parkinson's disease. Far too often, individuals are made to feel ashamed of their visible symptoms like tremors, facial masking, or soft speech. This reality can lead to social withdrawal, depression, and even delayed medical care. Research has shown that perceived stigma is not only linked to reduced quality of life, but it also correlates with worse outcomes. That's why, when someone like Osbourne rises up and speaks out, it matters. It sends a powerful message that Parkinson's does not define a person, and that no one should suffer in silence. Many people with Parkinson's disease choose to conceal their diagnosis from those closest to them. A recent study published in Scientific Reports found that nearly 23% of participants kept their condition hidden, even from family members. Broader surveys have suggested that more than half of individuals with Parkinson's disease may conceal symptoms, mask tremors, or avoid public situations due to stigma and fear of judgment. People who hide their diagnosis frequently report lower social support, reduced engagement in physical activity, and significantly worse emotional well-being. These findings underscore how pervasive and harmful disclosure avoidance can be.