Podcasts about National academy

In this RE-RELEASE episode Garth interviews Elizabeth Loftus from the University of California, Irvine in Irvine, CA. It was a Psychology Today magazine article in 1974 that launched her public fame, and her eyewitness testimony and false memory work have lasting influence. She is a world-renown expert who has experienced cancel culture, death threats, but also induction into the National Academy of Sciences. Elizabeth discusses the current state of misinformation, challenges in solving the two-body problem, and more.

Daniel is joined by Dr. Debendra Das Sharma, a Senior Fellow and Chief I/O architect in the Data Platforms and Artificial Intelligence Group at Intel. He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), Fellow of IEEE, and Fellow of International Academy of AI Sciences. He is a leading expert on I/O subsystem and interface… Read More

The lure of health influencers and AI chat bots is strong. More and more people are placing trust in them to answer their health problems, misplaced trust - as we know these AIs can misinform. At the same time, people are struggling to access the NHS, and when they do doctors have little time or the right tools to unpick complicated science, and challenge misunderstandings. So in this roundtable, we're asking, are we in danger of the NHS making the problem of misinformation worse, and what can we do to combat that. Joining Kamran Abbasi, the BMJ's editor in chief are: Deborah Cohen: Freelance Journalist; Senior Visiting Fellow at LSE Health Kamila Hawthorne: Chair of the National Academy for Social Prescribing Nnena Osuji: Consultant haematologist and CEO of North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust Chapters [00:00] The rise of health influencers [03:55] Patient satisfaction and the NHS [05:58] The "Infodemic" and clinical impact [11:04] Digital literacy and health inequalities [16:40] Questions from the audience   Reading list: Cohen D. Bad Influence: How the Internet Hijacked Our Health. Oneworld Publications; 2026. Satisfaction with NHS hits record low, but public still back founding principles - The BMJ

Sea Change travels to the Walter Anderson Museum of Art in Ocean Springs, Mississippi, for a lively live panel discussion about the future of seafood. For more than a century, the Gulf seafood industry has shaped towns, cultures, and identities along the coast. Yet, if you talk to almost anyone who works on the water, they'll tell you the Gulf seafood story has changed more in the last 30 years than the hundred years before that. If you care about what's on your plate, what happens to this coast, or what kind of future we're leaving to the next generation of fishers and eaters, you're in the right place. CREDITSThis episode of Sea Change Live was hosted by Executive Producer Carlyle Calhoun. Eva Tesfaye edited the episode. Sound design by Kurt Kohnen. Live music performed by Grits and Greens.We'd like to thank the Walter Anderson Museum of Art, Eagle Point Oyster Company, Holy Ground Oyster Company, Grits and Greens, and the panelists Ryan Bradley, Matthew Mayfield, Boyce Upholt, and Alex Perry. Sea Change is a WWNO and WRKF production. We are part of the NPR Podcast Network and distributed by PRX. Sea Change is made possible with major support from the Gulf Research Program of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. WWNO's Coastal Desk is supported by the Walton Family Foundation, the Meraux Foundation, and the Greater New Orleans Foundation. 

Sanjoy Paul is an Indian-American computer scientist, engineer, and innovation leader (born January 22, 1962). He currently serves as Executive Director of Rice Nexus (Rice University's premier innovation and prototyping hub) and AI Houston, as well as Associate Vice President for Technology Development at Rice University, where he also lectures in Computer Science.He is a Fellow of the IEEE (FIEEE) and was recently elected a Fellow of the National Academy of Inventors (FNAI) in 2025 for his contributions to AI, IoT, and related technologies. With 95 patents to his name, his work focuses on integrating artificial intelligence/machine learning, Internet of Things (IoT), computer networking, 5G, and extended reality (XR) to create intelligent systems for industries like healthcare, energy, manufacturing, and space.His career includes senior roles such as Managing Director at Accenture Technology Labs (leading R&D in robotics, 5G, digital twins, and AI), Global Digital Head at Wipro, leadership positions at Infosys, Bell Labs, and as Founder/CEO of RelevantAd Technologies. He holds a B.Tech from IIT Kharagpur (1985), a PhD in Electrical Engineering from the University of Maryland (1992), and an MBA from Wharton (2005).

What if understanding how AI thinks could reveal uncomfortable truths about how your own brain works, and give you powerful tools to make smarter decisions, resist manipulation, and upgrade your cognition at the root level? -Watch this episode on YouTube for the full video experience: https://www.youtube.com/@DaveAspreyBPR Host Dave Asprey sits down with Tom Griffiths, the Henry R. Luce Professor of Information Technology, Consciousness, and Culture in the Departments of Psychology and Computer Science at Princeton University. Griffiths directs Princeton's Computational Cognitive Science Lab, a research group focused on understanding the mathematical foundations of human cognition, and the Princeton Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence. He is the coauthor of Algorithms to Live By and the author of the new book The Laws of Thought, and his award-winning research has appeared in Science, Nature, and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Together, Dave and Tom go deep on the cognitive science behind human performance, brain optimization, and the surprising overlap between biohacking and artificial intelligence. They explore why your body filters reality before your conscious brain ever sees it, how your mitochondria function as a distributed cognitive network, and what that means for longevity, decision-making, and neuroplasticity. You'll Learn: Why AI models reveal that humans may be more "stochastic parrots" than we'd like to admit How your mitochondria pre-process sensory reality before your auditory cortex even fires Why emotions like anger, love, and remorse are computational tools evolution built into your reward function How low energy and blood sugar directly degrade your decision-making at a hardware level What "resource rationality" means and how to use it to make better decisions under constraint Why AI systems have measurable psychological personalities, and which ones are least likely to mess with your head How neuroplasticity can eliminate the inner critic and reshape your mental operating system Why two-process cognition (fast and slow thinking) is a feature, not a bug, of human intelligence Thank you to our sponsors! -BEYOND Biohacking Conference 2026 | Register with code DAVE300 for $300 off https://beyondconference.com-Essentia | Go to https://myessentia.com/dave and use code DAVE for $100 off The Dave Asprey Upgrade.-Quantum Upgrade | Try it free for 15 days — no credit card required — at QuantumUpgrade.io/DAVE. Simple. Powerful. Backed by data.-Go to timeline.com/dave and save 20% with code DAVE20 Dave Asprey is a four-time New York Times bestselling author, founder of Bulletproof Coffee, and the father of biohacking. With over 1,000 interviews and 1 million monthly listeners, The Human Upgrade brings you the knowledge to take control of your biology, extend your longevity, and optimize every system in your body and mind. Each episode delivers cutting-edge insights in health, performance, neuroscience, supplements, nutrition, biohacking, emotional intelligence, and conscious living. New episodes are released every Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, and Sunday (BONUS). Dave asks the questions no one else will and gives you real tools to become stronger, smarter, and more resilient. Keywords: AI, cognitive science, Tom Griffiths, The Laws of Thought, Princeton, brain optimization, neuroplasticity, mitochondria, decision-making, biohacking, Dave Asprey, human performance, longevity, anti-aging, consciousness, large language models, dopamine, reward function, resource rationality, emotions, game theory, altered states, chronic fatigue, dual process theory, Danger Coffee, Smarter Not Harder, cognitive biases, memory, AI bias, neurofeedback, Algorithms to Live By Resources: • Get Tom's new book: https://www.amazon.com/Laws-Thought-Quest-Mathematical-Theory/dp/1250358353 • Get My 2026 Clean Nicotine Roadmap | Enroll for free at https://daveasprey.com/2026-clean-nicotine-roadmap/ • Dave Asprey's Latest News | Go to https://daveasprey.com/ to join Inside Track today. • Danger Coffee: https://dangercoffee.com/discount/dave15 • My Daily Supplements: SuppGrade Labs (15% Off) • Favorite Blue Light Blocking Glasses: TrueDark (15% Off) • Dave Asprey's BEYOND Conference: https://beyondconference.com • Dave Asprey's New Book – Heavily Meditated: https://daveasprey.com/heavily-meditated • Join My Substack (Live Access To Podcast Recordings): https://substack.daveasprey.com/ • Upgrade Labs: https://upgradelabs.com Timestamps: 00:00 – Intro00:50 - Tom's Background & Chronic Fatigue 10:22 – Mathematics of Mind 12:43 – Memory and Emotion 15:29 – Decision Making Under Constraints 21:10 – Computational Problems of Consciousness 24:18 – Reality Pre-Processing 26:14 – Meat Robots vs Stochastic Parrots 29:21 – Emotions: Game Theory 35:39 – Dual Systems: Model-Based vs Model-Free 39:22 – Mitochondria and Consciousness 50:00 – Testing AI Like Humans 52:11 – Choosing AI Models 57:14 – AI Research Questions See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of Talk Nerdy, Cara is joined by Professor of Social Sciences at Harvard University, Affiliated Research Professor at the American Bar Foundation, and member of the National Academy of Sciences, Dr. Robert J. Sampson. They discuss his new book, Marked by Time: How Social Change Has Transformed Crime and the Life Trajectories of Young Americans. Follow Robert's work: @RobertJSampson

Dr. David Sedlak is the Plato Malozemoff Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Co-Director of the Berkeley Water Center, Deputy Director of the National Science Foundation Engineering Research Center for Reinventing the Nation's Urban Water Infrastructure, and Director of the Institute for Environmental Science and Engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. In addition, he is author of the book Water 4.0: The Past, Present, and Future of the World's Most Vital Resource. David is working to create technologies that will allow future generations to have access to adequate amounts of clean, safe water. When David isn't working, he enjoys long-distance running. He often runs along the many trails in the Berkeley area, and he participates in an annual local trails marathon. David earned his Bachelor's degree in environmental science from Cornell University. After college, he worked as a Staff Scientist at Environ Corporation in Princeton, New Jersey. David then attended graduate school at the University of Wisconsin, Madison where he was awarded his Ph.D. in water chemistry. Prior to joining the faculty at UC, Berkeley, David conducted postdoctoral research at the Swiss Federal Institute for Environmental Science and Technology in Dübendorf, Switzerland. Throughout his career, David has received numerous awards and honors, including a National Science Foundation CAREER Development Award, the Paul L. Busch Award for Innovation in Applied Water Quality Research, a Fulbright Senior Scholar Award, a Fulbright Alumni Initiative Award, the U.S. National Academy of Engineering Gilbreth Lecture Award, and the Athalie Richardson Irvine Clarke Prize for Excellence in Water Research. He has also been named an Elected Member of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering, as well as a Rydell Distinguished Visiting Professor at Gustavus Adolphus College and the Francqui Foundation Chair, Ghent University. In our interview, David shares more about his life and research.

Whether Americans realize it or not, federal oversight and watchdog organizations can be enormously impactful in how the government spends money, makes laws and builds for the future. So why don't more Americans know about the connections between lawmakers and oversight bodies? Fellow Tim Persons, Principal at PricewaterhouseCoopers and Dan Lips of the Foundation for American Innovation joined James-Christian Blockwood to discuss the importance of oversight and how we should think about the role of Congress in everything from spending to building, for the future and beyond. Management Matters is a presentation of the National Academy of Public Administration produced by Lizzie Alwan and Matt Hampton and edited by Matt Hampton. Support the Podcast Today at: donate@napawash.org or 202-347-3190Episode music: Hope by Mixaund | https://mixaund.bandcamp.comMusic promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comFollow us on YouTube for clips and more: @NAPAWASH_YT

Welcome to the latest episode of L.I.F.T.S, your bite-sized dose of the Latest Industry Fitness Trends and Stories. Recorded live at Connected Health & Fitness Summit 2026, Matthew Januszek and Mohammed Iqbal sit down with three industry leaders to unpack the convergence of fitness, technology, wellness, and human intelligence. Guests include: David Van Daff (NASM): A 30-year fitness industry veteran representing the National Academy of Sports Medicine, discussing certification evolution, AI in training, and the expanding expectations placed on personal trainers. Jeff Yasuda (Feed Media Group): Co-founder of Feed FM, sharing insights on music, AI vs HI, ecosystem trends, and how human curation still powers engagement. Julian Barnes (BFS): Co-founder of BFS and co-chair of Connected Health & Fitness 2026, offering data-driven insights on studio growth, mindset, and the role of people in an increasingly automated world. Key Topics include: How personal training evolved pre and post pandemic. Why AI will not replace trainers, but trainers using AI may dominate. The rise of ecosystem thinking in connected fitness. AI vs HI: why human intelligence still matters. The mindset separating scalable studio operators from everyone else. Why tech must serve frontline staff, not overwhelm them. The demographic challenge facing gyms and studios. How coaches and trainers remain the most powerful influencers in fitness.

The Alliance for Civics in the Academy hosted "How Can Universities Strengthen Civic Education in K–12 Schools?" with Jennifer McNabb, Joshua Dunn, and Jenna Storey on March 4, 2026, from 9:00-10:00 a.m. PT. Universities are increasingly reexamining their role as incubators of effective citizenship. An essential yet often overlooked part of this work is strengthening K–12 civic education. This webinar explores how efforts within higher education can support civic learning in K–12 schools, with particular emphasis on the academy's role in training the next generation of educators. ABOUT THE SPEAKERS Meira Levinson is a political theorist/philosopher of education who is working to start a global field of educational ethics that is philosophically rigorous, disciplinarily and experientially inclusive, and both relevant to and informed by educational policy and practice. In doing so, she draws upon scholarship from multiple disciplines as well as her eight years of experience teaching middle school humanities, civics, history, and English in the Atlanta and Boston Public Schools.  Meira has written or co-edited nine books, including Civic Contestation in Global Education and Educational Equity in a Global Context (both 2024, with Ellis Reid, Tatiana Geron, and Sara O'Brien), Instructional Moves for Powerful Teaching in Higher Education (2023, co-authored with Jeremy Murphy), Democratic Discord in Schools (2019, with Jacob Fay), winner of the 2020 AERA Moral Development and Education SIG Outstanding Book Award, and Dilemmas of Educational Ethics (2016, with Jacob Fay). Her book No Citizen Left Behind (2012) won awards in political science, philosophy, social studies, and education and has been translated into Chinese and Japanese. Meira shares educational ethics resources on JusticeinSchools.org, materials to support K-12 educators working in politically charged environments at Educational Values in Action, and resources for youth activists and teacher allies at YouthinFront.org. Each of these projects reflects Levinson's commitment to achieving productive cross-fertilization — without loss of rigor — among scholarship, policy, and practice. Meira earned a B.A. in philosophy from Yale and a D.Phil. in politics from Nuffield College, Oxford University. Her work has been supported by fellowships from Guggenheim, the Edmond & Lily Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard, Harvard Radcliffe Institute, and the National Academy of Education. Prior to joining the Stanford faculty, Meira taught at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Jennifer McNabb is Professor and Head of the Department of History at the University of Northern Iowa, where she teaches courses on early modern European history and the history of England. She was Co-Chair of UNI's Civic Education Task Force, which created UNI's Center for Civic Education, and she was Co-PI for a National Endowment for the Humanities Connections Grant that developed UNI's first civic education curriculum: "Civic Literacy, Engagement and the Humanities." McNabb is also a Co-PI of a national grant that will establish the Iowa Civic Educators Institute, providing professional development opportunities for in-service and pre-service social studies and history teachers throughout the state. McNabb has received several awards for her teaching and has completed four courses for The Teaching Company's The Great Courses on the Renaissance, witchcraft, sex, and marriage. She currently serves as a Councilor in the Professional Division of the American Historical Association and as president of the Midwest Conference on British Studies. Joshua Dunn (PhD, University of Virginia) serves as Executive Director of the Institute of American Civics at the Howard H. Baker School of Public Policy and Public Affairs at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. His research and teaching focus on constitutional law and history, education policy, federalism, and freedom of speech and religion. His books include Complex Justice: The Case of Missouri v. Jenkins (University of North Carolina Press), From Schoolhouse to Courthouse: The Judiciary's Role in American Education (Brookings Institution Press) and Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University (Oxford University Press).  Moderator Jenna Silber Storey is the Ravenel Curry Chair in Civic Thought in the Social, Cultural, and Constitutional Studies Division of the American Enterprise Institute, and Co-Director of AEI's Center for the Future of the American University.  She is also an SNF Agora Fellow at Johns Hopkins University and a Research Fellow at the Civitas Institute at the University of Texas at Austin.  She previously taught political philosophy at Furman University, where she was an Assistant Professor in the Department of Politics and International Affairs, and Executive Director of Furman's Tocqueville Program.  Her writing has appeared in outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The Boston Globe, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed, First Things, and The National Endowment for the Humanities flagship journal, Humanities.  Dr. Storey is the co-author, with her husband Ben, of Why We Are Restless:  On the Modern Quest for Contentment (Princeton University Press, 2021).  They are currently working on a book titled The Art of Choosing: How Liberal Education Should Prepare You for Life.

Scripture Referenced2 Corinthians 1:3-7Galatians 6:22 Peter 1:3-9Psalm 103:1-82 Corinthians 4:16-18Philippians 2:14-15Psalm 55:221 Peter 5:6, 7 2 Thessalonians 2:16, 17Sources ReferencedStanford Research on Complaining and the Brain https://x.com/shiningscience/status/2013113758386987099?s=61&t=tlwkbxDptbUski5ck2qYEASophie L. Kjærvik and Brad J. Bushman, “A Meta-Analytic Review of Anger Management Activities That Increase or Decrease Arousal: What Fuels or Douses Rage?” Clinical Psychology Review 109 (2024): 102414.Lauren C. Michl et al., “Rumination as a Mechanism Linking Stressful Life Events to Symptoms of Depression and Anxiety: Longitudinal Evidence in Early Adolescents and Adults,” Journal of Abnormal Psychology, volume 122, no. 2 (2013), pages 339–352.Catherine B. Stroud et al., “Rumination, Excessive Reassurance Seeking, and Stress Generation among Early Adolescent Girls,” The Journal of Early Adolescence, vol. 38, no. 2 (2018), pages 139–163Yvette I. Sheline et al., “The Default Mode Network and Self-Referential Processes in Depression,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106, no. 6 (2009): 1942-1947Matthew D. Lieberman et al., “Putting Feelings into Words: Affect Labeling Disrupts Amygdala Activity in Response to Affective Stimuli,” Psychological Science 18, no. 5 (2007): 421–22.

The Alliance for Civics in the Academy hosts "What Counts as Success? Assessing the Impact of Civics in Higher Ed" with Trygve Throntveit, Rachel Wahl, Joseph Kahne, and Peter Levine on February 18, 2026, from 9:00-10:00 a.m. PT. As higher education renews its commitment to civic education, questions about how to define and measure success have become increasingly urgent. This webinar examines the strengths and limitations of common metrics and considers how different measures reflect competing visions of civic purpose in higher education. Participants explore emerging frameworks for assessing civic learning and engagement, and discuss how institutions can align assessment practices with their educational missions and democratic goals. ABOUT THE SPEAKERS Rachel Wahl is an associate professor in the Social Foundations Program, Department of Educational Leadership, Foundations, and Policy at the School of Education and Human Development at the University of Virginia. She also serves as Director of the Good Life Political Project at the UVa Karsh Institute of Democracy. Her research focuses on learning through public dialogue between people on opposing sides of political divides. Her most recent book is Keeping Our Enemies Closer: Political Dialogue in Polarized Democracies (University of Pennsylvania Press, forthcoming October 2026). Her prior research focused on efforts by community activists to change police officers' beliefs and behavior through activism and education, which is the subject of her first book, Just Violence: Torture and Human Rights in the Eyes of the Police (Stanford University Press, 2017). Her research has been funded by donors such as the Educating Character Initiative, the Spencer Foundation and National Academy of Education, the Carnegie Corporation, and the federal Institute of International Education.  Joseph Kahne is the Ted and Jo Dutton Presidential Professor for Education Policy and Politics and Director of the Civic Engagement Research Group (CERG) at the University of California, Riverside. Professor Kahne's research focuses on the influence of school practices and digital media on youth civic and political development. For example, with funding from the Institute of Educational Sciences (IES), and in partnership with scholars from Ohio State, Brown, and UCR, CERG has launched and is studying the impact of Connecting Classrooms to Congress (CC2C). CC2C is a social studies curricular unit that enables students to learn and deliberate about a controversial societal issue and then participate in an online townhall with their Member of Congress. In addition, Kahne and CERG are currently studying the Educating for American Democracy Roadmap. This work takes place through a partnership with reformers and school districts in NM, OK, and LA. In addition to studying the impact of these curricular experiences on young people's civic development, with John Rogers, we are currently devoting particular attention to the politics of democratic education. We are examining ways the political contexts of school districts shape possibilities for democratic education and the varied ways educators respond.  Professor Kahne was Chair of the MacArthur Foundation's Youth and Participatory Politics Research Network. Kahne was a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences Commission on the Practice of Democratic Citizenship. He currently chairs the Educating for American Democracy Research Task Force. Professor Kahne is a member of the National Academy of Education and a Fellow of the American Educational Research Association. He can be reached at jkahne@ucr.edu and his work is available at https://www.civicsurvey.org/ Trygve Throntveit, PhD, was appointed Research Professor in Higher Education and Associate Director of the Center for Economic and Civic Learning (CECL) at Ball State University in August of 2025. During the previous five years, he served as Director of Strategic Partnership and Civic Renewal Programming at the Minnesota Humanities Center (MHC), and as Global Fellow for History and Public Policy at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. At MHC, Dr. Throntveit expanded the Third Way Civics (3WC) initiative for undergraduate civic learning--which he first developed with partners at Ball State and Southeastern Universities in 2019--into a multi-state program, training dozens of faculty in Minnesota, Indiana, Florida, Missouri, and Montana to infuse student-centered, active civic learning into their regular courses and helping several colleges and universities build the original, US history and politics version of 3WC into their general curricula. As a result of his work on Third Way Civics, was selected by Campus Compact and the Civic Learning and Democracy Engagement coalition to co-author an upcoming guide to designing and implementing rigorous civic learning opportunities across the undergraduate curriculum, and has delivered presentations and workshops on 3WC and civic learning more generally across the United States as well as Austria, Germany, Japan, and Korea. Trained as a historian, Dr. Throntveit is an active scholar in the fields of history and political theory as well as civic learning, having published articles and books examining past and present developments in US politics, foreign policy, and social thought and served for eight years as editor of The Good Society, the journal of the transdisciplinary Civic Studies field. He has taught at Harvard University, Dartmouth College, and Minnesota State University-Mankato, and has overseen public humanities programs bringing communities into productive conversation across their differences on issues as diverse as election integrity, US-Tribal relations, and water use. Dr. Throntveit lives and works in Minneapolis, where oversees the increasingly national 3WC initiative and also directs the Twin Cities-based Institute for Public Life and Work, which he co-founded with Harry C. Boyte and Marie-Louise Strom in 2021.  Moderator Peter Levine is a philosopher and political scientist who specializes on civic life and has helped to develop Civic Studies as an international intellectual movement. In the domain of civic education, Levine was a co-organizer and co-author of The Civic Mission of Schools (2003), The College, Career & Citizenship Framework for State Social Studies Standards (2013) and The Educating for American Democracy Roadmap (2021). He is also the author of eight books, including most recently We Are the Ones We Have Been Waiting For: The Promise of Civic Renewal in America (Oxford University Press, 2013) and What Should We Do? A Theory of Civic Life (Oxford University Press, 2022).

In this episode, we're joined by Colleen Wegimont, one of those “gold standard” leaders in our profession whose passion is contagious and whose impact runs deep.Colleen shares her journey in health and physical education, including what first drew her to the field, the mentors and moments that helped shape her path, and the experiences that confirmed she was exactly where she was meant to be. We also talk about leadership and what it looks like to support teachers well, how to serve in ways that truly move the profession forward, and why professional organizations like NAHPL matter now more than ever.You'll hear Colleen's heart for advocacy, her commitment to helping others grow, and the kind of perspective that only comes from years of doing the work with consistency, care, and purpose. And because it wouldn't be Scaling the Summit without a little fun, we wrap up with some rapid-fire favorites and get to know Colleen beyond her title.Visit our website to learn more about the National Academy: nahpl.org

A legend to the legends! Jeff Barry was named one of Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Songwriters of All Time and is inducted into both the Songwriters Hall of Fame and the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. "Tell Laura I Love Her." "Da Doo Ron Ron," "Then He Kissed Me," "Be My Baby," "(Christmas) Baby Please Come Home," "Chapel of Love," "River Deep - Mountain High," "Doo Wah Diddy," "Leader of the Pack," "Hanky Panky," "Sugar, Sugar," "I Honestly Love You." It's mind boggling!  PART ONE Paul and Scott chat about crossing a new friendship milestone and the long road to getting to speak with the unbelievably cool Jeff Barry. PART TWO Our in-depth interview with Jeff BarryABOUT JEFF BARRY Jeff Barry began his career as a recording artist for RCA and Decca Records, but attracted more attention for his original songs. After scoring pop hits with “Tell Laura I Love Her” and Sam Cooke's recording of “Teenage Sonata” in 1960, Jeff joined forces with Ellie Greenwich and Phil Spector to pen such classics as “Da Doo Ron Ron,” “Then He Kissed Me,” “Be My Baby,” “Christmas (Baby Please Come Home),” “Chapel of Love,” and “River Deep – Mountain High.” Greenwich and Barry also recorded together as the Raindrops while continuing to find success with other artists, including landing number one hits with “Doo Wah Diddy Diddy,” “Leader of the Pack,” and the Tommy James and the Shondells recording of “Hanky Panky.” Rolling Stone magazine's 2004 list of the “500 Greatest Rock Songs” included six Barry-Greenwich compositions, more than any other non-performing songwriting team. As a producer, Barry helmed such hits as “Cherry, Cherry” by Neil Diamond and “I'm a Believer” by The Monkees. After parting ways with Greenwich, Jeff began writing with Andy Kim, with whom he had the biggest hit of 1969 when he co-wrote and produced “Sugar, Sugar” by the fictional cartoon band The Archies. A few years later, Jeff was nominated for the Song of the Year Grammy for Olivia Newton John's 1974 chart-topping recording of “I Honestly Love You.” Additionally, he found success on the country charts in the 1970s and ‘80s with top 5 singles such as “Out of Hand,” recorded by Gary Stewart” and “Lie to You For Your Love,” recorded by the Bellamy Brothers. Never bound by genre categories, he also enjoyed top 5 R&B successes in those decades with songs such as “Heavy Makes You Happy” for the Staple Singers and “The Last Time I Made Love,” a song he wrote with Barry Mann and Cynthia Weil that was recorded by Joyce Kennedy and Jeffrey Osborne. In addition to writing more than 50 different songs that have reached the top 40 on the Billboard charts, Jeff penned the theme songs for TV shows such as One Day at a Time (“This Is It”), The Jeffersons (“Movin' on Up”), and Family Ties (“Without Us”). In 2019 he and writing partner Clarence Jey composed and wrote songs for the animated Nickelodeon show Lego City Adventures.  Jeff Barry and Ellie Greenwich are in the top 20 of Rolling Stone's list of the 100 Greatest Songwriters of All Time and were inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 2010. Jeff has received a Lifetime Achievement Award from the National Academy of Songwriters and was inducted into the Songwriters Hall of Fame.  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Today on Nudge, Professor Katie Slocombe shares how chimpanzees handle power, build alliances, and jostle for status in their troop. It's the first time on Nudge that we've looked at the primate roots of leadership and influence, with plenty of insight into how we humans behave at work (and everywhere else). Don't miss it.  ---  Subscribe to the Nudge Newsletter (and get a surprise gift): https://nudge.kit.com/subscribe Connect on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/phill-agnew/ Watch Nudge on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@nudgepodcast/ --- Today's sources:  Slocombe, K. E., & Zuberbühler, K. (2007). Chimpanzees modify recruitment screams as a function of audience composition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(43), 17228–17233.Slocombe, K. E., Waller, B. M., & Liebal, K. (2011). The language void: The need for multimodality in primate communication research. Animal Behaviour, 81(5), 919–924.

Welcome to the Social-Engineer Podcast: The Doctor Is In Series – where we discuss understandings and developments in the field of psychology.  In today's episode, Chris and Dr. Abbie discuss decision fatigue—how making too many choices throughout the day drains mental energy and affects judgment. They explain how stress and lack of sleep make it worse, how it differs from burnout, and why leaders and parents are especially vulnerable. The episode also shares simple, practical strategies to reduce daily decisions, protect mental energy, and prioritize recovery.  [Mar 2, 2026]  00:00 - Intro  00:56 - Show Updates and Sponsors  02:35 - What Decision Fatigue Is  03:34 - Stress, Sleep, and Mental Energy  05:12 - Mental vs. Physical Limits  07:13 - Decision Fatigue vs. Burnout  10:22 - Leadership, Empathy, and Hard Decisions  14:33 - Prevention: Routines and Breaks  20:43 - Advisors and AI Caution  24:38 - Everyday Life and Parenting Load  27:23 - Recovery Outlets and Wrap-Up  28:49 - Closing and Next Month's Topic (Diet Culture)    Find us online:    LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/dr-abbie-maroño-phd    Instagram: @DoctorAbbieofficial    LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/christopherhadnagy    References:   Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252   Baumeister, R. F., & Tierney, J. (2011). Willpower: Rediscovering the greatest human strength. Penguin Press.   Danziger, S., Levav, J., & Avnaim-Pesso, L. (2011). Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(17), 6889–6892. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018033108   Davidson, R. J., & McEwen, B. S. (2012). Social influences on neuroplasticity: Stress and interventions to promote well-being. Nature Neuroscience, 15(5), 689–695. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3093   Fleming, S. M., & Dolan, R. J. (2012). The neural basis of metacognitive ability. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1594), 1338–1349. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0417   Hagger, M. S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2010). Ego depletion and the strength model of self-control: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 495–525. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019486   Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.  

Another episode where the guest is not a sense-making prophet or a galaxy-brained guru, as we engage in academic dialogos with Oxford psychologist Andrew Przybylski. This is a preview of our Decoding Academia series on Patreon (now 30+ episodes deep), where we swap internet gurus and rhetoric for actual researchers and empirical debates.Andrew's work spans motivation, gaming, and digital technology. His most recent crime is that he studies the impact of technology and has not found evidence that it is destroying wellbeing and ushering in civilisational collapse. We discuss the ongoing moral panic around smartphones, social media, and teenagers' allegedly pulverised minds and why much of the debate rests on statistical techniques roughly equivalent to staring deeply at Excel spreadsheets and hammering SPSS until the desired narrative appears.We get into measurement problems around “screen time,” why trivially small correlations become front-page catastrophes, and how the discourse rewards confident storytelling far more than (boring) careful causal inference. Also covered: cross-cultural evidence, the policy implications of airport pop science bestsellers, and the potential civilisational threat posed by Warhammer 40k.If you enjoy episodes where we analyse methods rather than metaphysics, the full Decoding Academia series lives on Patreon.Relevant Research (Przybylski & collaborators)Andrew's Academic Profile and Personal WebsiteFassi, L., Ferguson, A. M., Przybylski, A. K., Ford, T. J., & Orben, A. (2025). Social media use in adolescents with and without mental health conditions. Nature human behaviour, 9(6), 1283-1299.Vuorre, M., & Przybylski, A. K. (2023). Estimating the association between Facebook adoption and well-being in 72 countries. Royal Society open science, 10(8).Vuorre, M., Orben, A., & Przybylski, A. K. (2021). There is no evidence that associations between adolescents' digital technology engagement and mental health problems have increased. Clinical Psychological Science, 9(5), 823-835.Orben, A., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019). The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use. Nature human behaviour, 3(2), 173-182.Orben, A., Dienlin, T., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019). Social media's enduring effect on adolescent life satisfaction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(21), 10226-10228.Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2017). A large-scale test of the goldilocks hypothesis: quantifying the relations between digital-screen use and the mental well-being of adolescents. Psychological science, 28(2), 204-215.Johannes, N., Vuorre, M., & Przybylski, A. K. (2021). Video game play is positively correlated with well-being. Royal Society open science, 8(2), 202049.Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of general psychology, 14(2), 154-166.

A study published in Nature Communications, published Feb 19, 2026, found that “pregnancy physically alters a woman's brain, with a second pregnancy bringing even more profound effects.” The researchers “performed brain scans on 110 women. Some were first-time mothers, others second-time moms, and some nulliparous women. Results showed that during a first pregnancy, the greatest changes occur in the structure and activity of the ‘default mode network' – the brain system responsible for self-reflection and mind wandering. Are these changes bad? Are they associated with long term hard? Are they adaptive? It's a complex question, with real answers. Listen in for details.1. Straathof, M., Halmans, S., Pouwels, P.J.W. et al. The effects of a second pregnancy on women's brain structure and function. Nat Commun 17, 1495 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-69370-82. de Lange AG, Kaufmann T, van der Meer D, et al. Population-Based Neuroimaging Reveals Traces of Childbirth in the Maternal Brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2019.3. Aleknaviciute J, Evans TE, Aribas E, et al.)Long-Term Association of Pregnancy and Maternal Brain Structure: The Rotterdam Study. European Journal of Epidemiology. 2022.4. Jung JH, Lee GW, Lee JH, et al. Multiparity, Brain Atrophy, and Cognitive Decline. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. 2020.5. Hu A, Xiong L, Wei H, et al. Association of Menarche, Menopause, and Reproductive History With Cognitive Performance in Older US Women: A Cross-Sectional Study From NHANES 2011-2014. BMC Public Health. 2025.6. Orchard ER, Ward PGD, Sforazzini F, et al. Relationship Between Parenthood and Cortical Thickness in Late Adulthood. PloS One. 20207. Hoekzema E, Barba-Müller E, Pozzobon C, et al. Pregnancy Leads to Long-Lasting Changes in Human Brain Structure. Nature Neuroscience. 2017.8. de Lange AG, Barth C, Kaufmann T, et al. Women's Brain Aging: Effects of Sex-Hormone Exposure, Pregnancies, and Genetic Risk for Alzheimer's Disease. Human Brain Mapping. 2020.Visit our SPONSOR's LINK to learn more about the Hemorrhage view CS Drape: https://www.perspectivemedical.org/

On Earth living things are everywhere from the deepest ocean depths to the highest mountain tops. On our home planet RNA (Ribonucleic Acid) is a complex essential molecule involved in the process of translating genetic information into the working components of living cells. In a recent paper in the peer reviewed scientific journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , Dr. Yuta Hirakawa and his team of two coauthors report on their experiments to produce RNA under conditions similar to those which may have occurred in the early history of Earth and Mars.

In this episode of the Epigenetics Podcast, we talked with Patrick Murphy from Cornell University about his work on gene regulation and cellular identity. Dr. Murphy's research focuses on the molecular mechanisms that govern gene expression through transcriptional and chromatin-based regulatory networks. At the start of the Interview Dr. Murphy describes an innovative single-molecule analytical approach he developed during his early research. This method enables the simultaneous detection of multiple epigenetic marks and contributes to his foundational studies on chromatin biology. Focusing on chromatin states, he introduces the concept of placeholder nucleosomes which are specialised nucleosomes that play key roles in maintaining a permissive chromatin state and facilitating gene activation during embryonic development. The discussion further explores Dr. Murphy's transition from studying Drosophila to working with zebrafish, highlighting his focus on chromatin reprogramming during zygotic genome activation. He presents data from his collaborations that reveal intriguing roles for specific chromatin marks, emphasising how these discoveries hold potential for understanding gene expression regulation in both zebrafish and mammalian models. Dr. Murphy also shares insights into a project investigating the impacts of paternal cigarette smoke on offspring health, which led to an exploration of systemic inflammation responses and their lasting effects on gene expression in the brain. This unique intersection of basic and translational research underlines the wide-ranging implications of his findings. References Murphy, P. J., Cipriany, B. R., Wallin, C. B., Ju, C. Y., Szeto, K., Hagarman, J. A., Benitez, J. J., Craighead, H. G., & Soloway, P. D. (2013). Single-molecule analysis of combinatorial epigenomic states in normal and tumor cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(19), 7772–7777. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1218495110 Murphy, P. J., Wu, S. F., James, C. R., Wike, C. L., & Cairns, B. R. (2018). Placeholder Nucleosomes Underlie Germline-to-Embryo DNA Methylation Reprogramming. Cell, 172(5), 993–1006.e13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.01.022 Park, B. J., Hua, S., Casler, K. D., Cefaloni, E., Ayers, M. C., Lake, R. F., Murphy, K. E., Vertino, P. M., O'Connell, M. R., & Murphy, P. J. (2025). CUT&Tag overcomes biases of ChIP and establishes chromatin patterns for repetitive genomic loci. iScience, 28(11), 113757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113757 Related Episodes Pioneer Transcription Factors and Their Influence on Chromatin Structure (Ken Zaret) In Vivo Nucleosome Structure and Dynamics (Srinivas Ramachandran) Nucleosome Positioning in Cancer Diagnostics (Vladimir Teif) Contact Epigenetics Podcast on Mastodon Epigenetics Podcast on Bluesky Dr. Stefan Dillinger on LinkedIn Active Motif on LinkedIn Active Motif on Bluesky Email: podcast@activemotif.com

Send a textWhat if calm isn't something you find after life settles… but something you practice while everything still feels loud, uncertain, and full? In this episode, I invite you into a deeply real reflection on stress, emotional weight, and the quiet moments of beauty that often go unnoticed in our busiest seasons. From stormy mornings by the water to the science of nervous system regulation and the Stoic wisdom of inner steadiness, this conversation gently challenges the idea that life must be peaceful before we allow ourselves to feel peace. If you've been carrying a lot lately — mentally, emotionally, or physically — this episode is a soft place to land, a reminder that even in the middle of chaos, there are small glimmers of calm waiting to be noticed.Quote of the week:“You have power over your mind — not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.” — Marcus AureliusCitations:Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. Bratman, G. N., Hamilton, J. P., Hahn, K. S., Daily, G. C., & Gross, J. J. (2015). Nature experience reduces rumination and subgenual prefrontal cortex activation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(28), 8567–8572.Stellar, J. E., John-Henderson, N., Anderson, C. L., Gordon, A. M., McNeil, G. D., & Keltner, D. (2015). Positive affect and markers of inflammation: Discrete positive emotions predict lower levels of inflammatory cytokines. Emotion, 15(2), 129–133.McEwen, B. S. (2007). Physiology and neurobiology of stress and adaptation: Central role of the brain. Physiological Reviews, 87(3), 873–904.Adam, T. C., & Epel, E. S. (2007). Stress, eating and the reward system. Physiology & Behavior, 91(4), 449–458.Let's go, let's get it done. Get more information at: http://projectweightloss.org

Artificial reefs have been credited with supporting fisheries, protecting rare species, and attracting tourists that boost the economy. But, of course, like any story about the environment, it gets complicated both here in the Gulf and on Cambodia's coast. If you'd like to know more about Alabama's booming artificial reef program, check out this article from Irina Zhorov.  EPISODE CREDITSThis episode was hosted by Executive Producer Carlyle Calhoun and reported by Eva Tesfaye and Leila Goldstein. The episode was edited by Johanna Zorn, with additional help from Rosemary Westwood, Michael McEwan, and Aubri Juhasz. The episode was fact-checked by Michael McEwan. Sound design by Kurt Kohnen. Our theme music is by Jon Batiste.Sea Change is a WWNO and WRKF production. We are part of the NPR Podcast Network and distributed by PRX. Sea Change is made possible with major support from the Gulf Research Program of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. WWNO's Coastal Desk is supported by the Walton Family Foundation, the Meraux Foundation, and the Greater New Orleans Foundation. 

Send a textAre medical errors still one of healthcare's biggest failures? In this clip from our episode “One Giant Leap for Healthcare AI”, host John Driscoll speaks with Dr. Robert Wachter, Author of A Giant Leap, about how AI could help reduce diagnostic mistakes at scaleListen to the full episode here

The journey to Mars is a long one so when humans arrive, we will need to maximize the science in order to understand the environment for a future there – and to learn more about how the universe formed. What are those big science questions we should seek to answer and how should the journey(s) be scheduled? After two years the National Academy of Sciences has published a report (Dec 2025) called “A Science Strategy for the Human Exploration of Mars”. In this episode Colleen Stover hosts the committee co-chairs The Honorable Dr. Dava Newman (MIT, former NASA Deputy Administrator) and Dr. Lindy Elkins-Tanton (Director, UC Berkely Space Sciences Laboratory).   You can read the full report on the NAS website. “A Science Strategy for the Human Exploration of Mars”. And if you want to dive deeper into the science objectives within the report, be sure to check out this excel sheet Table J-3: STM of the Panel on Biological and Physical Sciences and Human Factors. This episode is part of the Future Forward Series that discusses some of the most cutting-edge topics in the space enterprise today – decisions today that will define the future in areas of space science, artificial intelligence, international relations, launch capabilities, new technologies, and capital investments.  Available by video or podcast. The Space Policy Show is produced by The Aerospace Corporation's Center for Space Policy and Strategy. It is a virtual series covering a broad set of topics that span across the space enterprise. CSPS brings together experts from within Aerospace, the government, academia, business, nonprofits, and the national labs. The show and their podcasts are an opportunity to learn about and to stay engaged with the larger space policy community. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch all episodes!

In this bonus episode, Nobel Prize-winning economist Daron Acemoglu joins Sam to challenge some of the most common assumptions about artificial intelligence's future. Drawing on his book Power and Progress, Daron argues that technology doesn't have a fixed destiny — and that today's choices will determine whether AI boosts workers or simply accelerates automation and inequality. He makes a case for focusing on new tasks that complement human skills, rather than replacing them, and warns that current incentives push AI toward centralization and automation by default. The conversation tackles productivity myths, reliability risks, and why regulation should proactively steer AI toward social good. Read the episode transcript here. Guest bio: Daron Acemoglu is an institute professor at MIT, faculty codirector of the James M. and Cathleen D. Stone Center on Inequality and Shaping the Future of Work, and a research affiliate at MIT's newly established Blueprint Labs. He is an elected fellow of the National Academy of Sciences, American Philosophical Society, the British Academy of Sciences, the Turkish Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Econometric Society, the European Economic Association, and the Society of Labor Economists. He is also a member of the Group of Thirty. He has authored six books, including Power and Progress: Our Thousand-Year Struggle Over Technology and Prosperity with Simon Johnson. His work in economics has been recognized around the world, notably with the Nobel Prize in economic sciences, along with co-laureates Johnson and James A. Robinson, in 2024. *Please take our listener survey: ⁠⁠mitsmr.com/podcastsurvey⁠⁠ It's short — we promise! — and all respondents will receive a free MIT SMR article collection, "Maximizing the Value of Generative AI." Me, Myself, and AI is a podcast produced by MIT Sloan Management Review and hosted by Sam Ransbotham. It is engineered by David Lishansky and produced by Allison Ryder. We encourage you to rate and review our show. Your comments may be used in Me, Myself, and AI materials. ME, MYSELF, AND AI® is a federally registered trademark of Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved.

When neuroscientists scanned the brains of people going along with a group, they expected to find lying. What they found instead was something far stranger. The group wasn't changing people's answers. It was changing what they actually saw. We'll get to that study in a minute. But first, I want you to remember the last time you were in a meeting, and you knew something was wrong. The numbers didn't add up. The risk was being underestimated. And someone needed to say it. Then the most senior person in the room spoke first: "I think this is exactly what we need." Heads nodded. Finance agreed. Marketing agreed. The consultant agreed. And by the time it was your turn, you heard yourself saying, "I have some minor concerns, but overall I think it's solid." You're not alone. Research shows that roughly half of employees stay silent at work rather than voice a concern. And among those who stayed quiet, 40% estimated they wasted 2 weeks or more replaying what they didn't say. Two weeks. Mentally rehearsing the point they should have made in a meeting that's already over. That silence isn't a character flaw. It's your neurology working against you. And today I'm going to show you exactly why it happens and how to stop it.  It starts with what was happening inside your head during that meeting you just remembered. Why Your Brain Surrenders to the Group Most people know about the Asch conformity experiments from the 1950s. People were asked to match line lengths, and seventy-five percent went along with answers that were obviously wrong. That result gets cited everywhere. But the more important study came fifty years later, and it revealed something the Asch experiment never could. In 2005, neuroscientist Gregory Berns at Emory University put people inside an MRI machine and ran a similar conformity task, this time with three-dimensional shape rotation. Like Asch, he planted actors who gave wrong answers. But unlike Asch, he could watch what was happening inside people's brains while the conformity was occurring. Berns expected the MRI to show activity in the prefrontal cortex, the brain's decision-making center, when people went along with wrong answers. That would mean they were knowingly lying to fit in. Just a social calculation. That's not what the scans showed. People who conformed showed no increased activity in decision-making regions. Instead, the activity showed up in the parts of the brain that handle visual and spatial perception, the occipital and parietal areas. The group wasn't changing people's answers. It was changing what they actually saw. Their brains were rewriting their experience to match the room. And the people who resisted the group? Their scans told a different story. Heightened activity in the amygdala, the brain's threat detection center. The same circuitry that fires when you encounter physical danger lit up when someone disagreed with the group. Berns put it plainly. The fear of social isolation activates the same neural machinery as the fear of genuine threats to survival. When you caved in that meeting, your neurology wasn't malfunctioning. It was doing exactly what it was designed to do. Keep you safe inside the tribe. This is why what I call mindjacking works so well. Algorithms manufacture social proof by showing you what's trending, what your friends liked, and what similar people chose. Your wiring responds the same way it does at the conference table. You're fighting your own threat-detection system every time you try to hold an independent position within a group. You can't turn off the wiring. But you can learn to catch it in the act. And that starts with one critical distinction. The First Skill: Separating Updating from Caving Sometimes the people around you know something you don't. Changing your mind in a group isn't always a surrender. Sometimes it's the smartest move in the room. The real skill is knowing which one just happened. You can test this in real time. When you feel your position shifting in a group, ask yourself three questions. First: Did someone introduce information I didn't have before? If the CFO reveals a data point that genuinely changes the calculus, updating your view isn't a weakness. It's intelligence. That's new evidence. Second: Can I articulate why I changed my mind, in specific terms? If you can say, "I shifted because of the margin data in Q3 that I hadn't seen," that's a real update. If you can only say, "I don't know, everyone seemed to think it was fine," that's capitulation. Third: Would I have reached this same conclusion alone, with the same information? This is the killer question. If the answer is no, and you only arrived at this position because others were already there, you haven't updated. You've surrendered. Getting this wrong is costly. And not just the one time. When you capitulate and call it updating, you train yourself to stop trusting your own analysis. Do it enough times, and you won't even bother preparing, because you already know you're going to defer. That's how capable people slowly become passengers in rooms where they should be driving. Capture those three questions somewhere you'll see them. They're your real-time check on whether you're being open-minded or spineless. Those questions work when you're already in the meeting and the pressure is live. But what if you could protect your thinking before the pressure even starts? The Pre-Meeting Lock-In The most important thing you can do to protect your independent thinking doesn't happen during the meeting. It happens before. I call it the Pre-Meeting Lock-In, and it takes less than two minutes. Before any meeting where a decision will be made, write down three things:  Your position  Two or three key reasons supporting it What would it take to change your mind Put it on paper. Put it in a note on your phone. Just get it out of your head and into a form you can reference. Why does this work? Because once the discussion starts, your mind is going to quietly edit your memories of what you believed. You'll start thinking, "Well, I wasn't really sure about that point anyway." Your pre-meeting notes are an anchor against that self-deception. They're a record of what you actually thought before the social pressure arrived. You want to see what happens when someone has the analysis but doesn't lock it in?  The night before the Challenger launch in January 1986, engineer Roger Boisjoly and his team at Morton Thiokol had the data. They knew the O-ring seals were dangerous in cold weather. They'd written memos. They'd run the numbers. They recommended against launching. But when NASA pushed back hard on the teleconference, Thiokol management called an off-line caucus and excluded the engineers from the room. When the call resumed, management reversed the recommendation. Boisjoly had the analysis. His managers had heard it. But under pressure from their biggest customer, the conclusion got edited in real time. Boisjoly later described it as an unethical forum driven by what he called "intense customer intimidation." He fought like hell, but the room won. That's the most extreme version of the problem. Life and death. But the mechanics are the same in every conference room. The analysis exists. The pressure arrives. And without something anchoring you to what you actually concluded, the room rewrites the story. There's a bonus effect to the Lock-In, too. When you've documented what it would take to change your mind, you've given yourself permission to be genuinely open. You're not being stubborn for the sake of it. You're saying, "Show me evidence that meets this threshold, and I'll update." That's intellectual honesty with a backbone. But you can know exactly what you think and still fail if you can't get anyone else to hear it. How to Dissent and Actually Be Heard Most dissent fails not because it's wrong, but because it's delivered badly.  Blurting out "I think this is a mistake" when the group is already aligned feels like an attack. People get defensive. Your point gets ignored, not because it lacked merit, but because your delivery threatened the group's cohesion. You triggered the same threat response in them that you've been learning to manage in yourself. Charlan Nemeth, a psychologist at UC Berkeley, has studied dissent for decades. You'd expect her research to show that dissent helps groups when the dissenter is right. When someone spots a flaw that everyone else missed. That makes intuitive sense. But that's not what she found. Nemeth discovered that when someone voices a genuine minority opinion, the entire group thinks more carefully. They consider more information, examine more alternatives, and reach better conclusions. And the group benefits even when the dissenter turns out to be wrong. Even when you're wrong, the act of dissenting makes the group smarter. Your disagreement forces everyone out of autopilot. Decades of research by Moscovici supports this. Minority voices don't just influence people in the moment. They shift perception afterward, in private, long after the meeting ends. That's the good news. The catch is in how the dissent happens. Nemeth tested what happens when dissent is assigned rather than authentic, when someone plays devil's advocate because they were told to. It doesn't produce the same effect. Groups can tell when disagreement is performative. The cognitive benefits only show up when the dissent is authentic. When someone actually believes what they're saying. That means the goal isn't just to voice disagreement. It's to voice it in a way that people can actually receive. And the hardest version of this isn't when you have a minor concern about an otherwise good plan. It's when the whole direction is wrong, and finding something to praise would be dishonest. In those moments, the move is to separate the people from the position. "I respect the work that went into this, and I know this isn't what anyone wants to hear, but I think we're solving the wrong problem." You're honoring the effort while challenging the direction. You're not attacking the tribe. You're trying to save it from a bad bet. When the stakes are lower, and you do see genuine merit, you can lead with that. "The market timing argument is strong, and I want to make sure we've stress-tested one thing before we commit." Same principle. You're working with their wiring instead of against it. Either way, your dissent has value beyond being right. Remember that. It's worth holding onto when your amygdala is screaming at you to stay quiet. Everything so far has assumed you're in a room with other people. Your amygdala can't tell the difference between a conference table and a phone screen. The Rooms You Can't See You're not just in meetings. You're in invisible rooms all day long. And most of the time, you don't even know you've walked into one. Every time you scroll past a post with ten thousand likes and think, "I guess that's the right take." Every time you read three articles with the same conclusion and stop questioning it. Every time an algorithm shows you what similar people chose, and you choose it too. Those are rooms full of nodding heads. And your amygdala responds to them the same way it responds to the conference table. Think about the last time you researched a major purchase. You probably started with some idea of what you wanted. Then you read reviews. Then you checked what was trending. Then you asked friends. By the time you decided, how much of that decision was yours? How much of it was the room? Or think about how you form opinions on topics you haven't studied deeply. You read a few articles. They mostly agree. You adopt the consensus. That feels like research. But Berns' scans tell us what's actually happening. Your brain isn't independently weighing the evidence. It's detecting a consensus and rewriting your perception to match. The same process that happens at the conference table is happening every time you open your phone. Mindjacking doesn't need to override your thinking. It just needs to make sure you never finish thinking for yourself before the crowd's answer arrives. And once it arrives, your neurology does the rest. The group doesn't just influence your answer; it shapes it. It rewrites your perception. The Lock-In works for these invisible rooms, too. Before you research a major purchase, write down what you actually want and what you're willing to pay. Before you dive into reviews and opinions, commit your criteria to paper. Before you ask friends what they think about a decision you've already analyzed, record your conclusion. Give yourself the same protection from algorithmic conformity that you'd want before walking into a boardroom. The skill isn't being contrarian. It's being first. First, to your own conclusion, before the room, any room, gets a vote. This is your challenge for the week. Think of one meeting you have coming up where a decision will be made. Before you walk in, open your notes app and type three lines. Line one: what you think. Line two: why. Line three: what would change your mind. That's it. Then sit in that meeting and watch what happens to your thinking when the room pushes back. I think you'll surprise yourself. What if the person you can't resist isn't your boss, your colleagues, or the algorithm? What if it's you? What happens when the decision you need to make threatens something deeper, when being wrong would mean something unbearable about who you are? That's where we're headed next. Closing If this episode gave you something useful, hit that subscribe button. I'm building a complete thinking toolkit here in the Thinking 101 series. If you got value today, share it with someone who could use it, especially anyone heading into a big meeting this week. Drop a comment and tell me: what's the hardest group you've ever had to disagree with? I read every comment and reply. Thanks for watching, and I'll see you in the next episode. Endnotes/References "roughly half of employees stay silent at work rather than voice a concern" / "forty percent estimated they wasted two weeks or more": VitalSmarts, Costly Conversations: Why The Way Employees Communicate Will Make or Break Your Bottom Line (Provo, UT: VitalSmarts, December 2016). In a study of 1,025 employees, 70 percent reported instances where they or others failed to speak up effectively when a peer did not pull their weight. Half wasted seven days or more avoiding crucial conversations. Forty percent estimated they wasted two weeks or more ruminating about the problem. A 2021 follow-up study by Crucial Learning (formerly VitalSmarts) of 1,100 people found the rumination figure had risen to 43 percent. The script's "roughly half" is drawn from the VitalSmarts finding that the majority of the workforce reported conversation failures, with half losing seven or more days to avoidance behaviors. Primary source: https://www.vitalsmarts.com/press/2016/12/costly-conversations-why-the-way-employees-communicate-will-make-or-break-your-bottom-line/. Follow-up study: https://cruciallearning.com/press/costly-conversations-how-lack-of-communication-is-costing-organizations-thousands-in-revenue/ "the Asch conformity experiments from the 1950s": Solomon E. Asch, "Effects of Group Pressure upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments," in Groups, Leadership and Men, ed. Harold Guetzkow (Pittsburgh: Carnegie Press, 1951), 177–190. The expanded report was published as Solomon E. Asch, "Studies of Independence and Conformity: I. A Minority of One Against a Unanimous Majority," Psychological Monographs: General and Applied 70, no. 9 (1956): 1–70. Asch conducted the line-judgment experiments at Swarthmore College. Participants judged which of three comparison lines matched a standard line, with confederates unanimously giving incorrect answers on critical trials. Across conditions, approximately 75 percent of participants conformed at least once, and the mean conformity rate was approximately one-third of critical trials. Group sizes varied across experiments, typically with 6–8 confederates and one real participant. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1952-00803-001 "neuroscientist Gregory Berns at Emory University put people inside an MRI machine": Gregory S. Berns, Jonathan Chappelow, Caroline F. Zink, Giuseppe Pagnoni, Megan E. Martin-Skurski, and Jim Richards, "Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity and Independence During Mental Rotation," Biological Psychiatry 58, no. 3 (August 1, 2005): 245–253. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.04.012. The study used functional magnetic resonance imaging with a mental rotation task. Participants (n=32, ages 19–41) judged whether three-dimensional shapes were rotated versions of each other while four confederates provided answers. Conformity was associated with functional changes in the occipital-parietal network (visual and spatial perception regions), not the prefrontal cortex. Independence was associated with heightened activity in the right amygdala and right caudate nucleus, regions linked to emotional salience and threat detection. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15978553/ "The group wasn't changing people's answers. It was changing what they actually saw": Berns et al., "Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity," 245–253. The researchers isolated the specifically social element of conformity by comparing brain activation when wrong answers came from a group of people versus when they came from computers. Conformity to group-sourced wrong answers produced greater activation bilaterally in visual cortex and right intraparietal sulcus, overlapping the baseline mental rotation network. Berns interpreted this as evidence that social conformity operates at a perceptual level rather than merely at a decision-making level. Full text PDF: https://pdodds.w3.uvm.edu/files/papers/others/2005/berns2005.pdf "Heightened activity in the amygdala": Berns et al., "Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity," 245–253. Participants who gave independent (correct) answers when the group was wrong showed significantly increased activation in the right amygdala and right caudate nucleus. The amygdala is associated with processing emotionally salient stimuli and threats. Berns described these findings as "consistent with the assumptions of social norm theory about the behavioral saliency of standing alone." The script's characterization that "the fear of social isolation activates the same neural machinery as the fear of genuine threats to survival" is an accessible paraphrase of this finding, consistent with the broader social pain literature (e.g., Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003), though Berns' paper does not use that exact language. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15978553/ "engineer Roger Boisjoly and his team at Morton Thiokol had the data": Roger M. Boisjoly, "Ethical Decisions — Morton Thiokol and the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster" (paper presented at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Annual Meeting, December 13–18, 1987). First presented as a talk at MIT in January 1987. Boisjoly, a specialist in O-ring seals and rocket joints at Morton Thiokol, documented how engineers recommended against the January 28, 1986 launch based on concerns about O-ring performance in cold temperatures. During the pre-launch teleconference, Thiokol management called an off-line caucus, excluded the engineers, and reversed the no-launch recommendation under pressure from NASA. Boisjoly described the forum as constituting "the unethical decision-making forum" driven by customer pressure. He was awarded the Prize for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The Online Ethics Center at the National Academy of Engineering hosts Boisjoly's full account: https://onlineethics.org/cases/ethical-decisions-morton-thiokol-and-space-shuttle-challenger-disaster-introduction. See also Russell P. Boisjoly, Ellen Foster Curtis, and Eugene Mellican, "Roger Boisjoly and the Challenger Disaster: The Ethical Dimensions," Journal of Business Ethics 8, no. 4 (April 1989): 217–230. doi:10.1007/BF00383335. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00383335 "Nemeth discovered that when someone voices a genuine minority opinion, the entire group thinks more carefully": Charlan J. Nemeth, In Defense of Troublemakers: The Power of Dissent in Life and Business (New York: Basic Books, 2018). Nemeth's research program at UC Berkeley, spanning four decades, demonstrated that exposure to minority dissent stimulates divergent thinking, broader information search, consideration of more alternatives, and higher-quality group decisions. The finding that dissent improves group performance even when the dissenter turns out to be wrong is documented across multiple studies. See also Charlan J. Nemeth, "Minority Influence Theory," IRLE Working Paper No. 218-10 (Berkeley: Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, May 2010). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1pz676t7 "Decades of research by Moscovici": Serge Moscovici, Elisabeth Lage, and Martine Naffrechoux, "Influence of a Consistent Minority on the Responses of a Majority in a Color Perception Task," Sociometry 32, no. 4 (December 1969): 365–380. In the original experiment, participants viewed blue slides while two confederates consistently called them green. The consistent minority condition produced a shift in approximately 8 percent of majority judgments toward the minority position, and roughly one-third of participants conformed at least once. In the inconsistent minority condition, the effect was negligible (approximately 1.25 percent). The script's claim that "minority voices don't just influence people in the moment — they shift perception afterward, in private" draws on Moscovici's subsequent conversion theory and research on the delayed and private effects of minority influence, including afterimage studies showing genuine perceptual shifts. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2786541 "Nemeth tested what happens when dissent is assigned rather than authentic": Charlan J. Nemeth, Joanie B. Connell, John D. Rogers, and Keith S. Brown, "Improving Decision Making by Means of Dissent," Journal of Applied Social Psychology 31, no. 1 (2001): 48–58. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02481.x. Groups deliberated a personal injury case under three conditions: authentic dissent (a genuine minority viewpoint), assigned devil's advocate (a member told to argue the opposing side), and no dissent. Authentic dissent was superior in stimulating consideration of opposing positions, original thought, and direct attitude change. The devil's advocate condition did not produce the same cognitive benefits, suggesting that groups detect and discount performative disagreement. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02481.x. See also Charlan Nemeth, Keith Brown, and John Rogers, "Devil's Advocate versus Authentic Dissent: Stimulating Quantity and Quality," European Journal of Social Psychology 31, no. 6 (2001): 707–720. doi:10.1002/ejsp.58.

Psychedelics are having a cultural moment. Research is promising. Stories of healing are everywhere. But here's the truth: these experiences aren't magic cures. And they aren't right for every nervous system at every time.   In this episode, Elisabeth Kristof and Jennifer Wallace slow the conversation down. Instead of asking, "Do psychedelics heal trauma?" They explore a more grounded question: What becomes possible when psychedelic or peak somatic experiences are approached through the lens of nervous system safety, preparation, and integration?   If you've been curious about psychedelics, already had experiences, or feel unsure whether they're right for you, this episode offers nuance, research, and deep nervous system perspective. Because post-traumatic growth isn't about becoming someone new. It's about becoming more available to the life that's already waiting for you.   Topic Covered Why psychedelics may reorganize meaning, not just reduce symptoms How trauma fragments narrative and how safety allows integration The science of psychological flexibility and why it predicts long-term outcomes What "somatic journeying" is and why it can feel disorienting The importance of preparation, titration, and facilitator trust Why intensity does not equal healing Psychedelics vs antidepressants in research on connectedness Default Mode Network (DMN), identity rigidity, and belief updating Why creativity often emerges when survival softens The risks of over-reliance and "chasing the medicine" Why discernment and self-trust matter more than hype   Chapters  00:00 – Psychedelics Aren't Magic Cures
 03:00 – Meaning-Making & Narrative Reorganization
 08:58 – Psychological Flexibility & Emotional Capacity
 17:00 – Preparation, Somatic Journeying & Integration
 23:29 – Connectedness & Relational Repair
 34:33 – Identity, Neuro Tags & the Default Mode Network
 41:03 – Creativity as a Byproduct of Safety
 48:14 – Discernment, Industry Hype & Self-Trust   Calls to Action: Neurosomatic Intelligence is now enrolling : https://neurosomaticintelligence.com/nsi-certification Sacred Synapse: an educational YouTube channel founded by Jennifer Wallace that explores nervous system regulation, applied neuroscience, consciousness, and psychedelic preparation and integration through Neurosomatic Intelligence.    Wayfinder Journal: Track nervous system patterns and support preparation and integration through Neurosomatic Intelligence.   FREE 1 Year Supply of Vitamin D + 5 Travel Packs from Athletic Greens when you use my exclusive offer: https://www.drinkag1.com/rewired  Learn to work with Boundaries at the level of the body and nervous system at https://www.boundaryrewire.com Get a two-week free trial of neurosomatic training at https://rewiretrial.com Sources:    Amada, N., et al. "The Transformative Potential of Psychedelic Experiences: A Qualitative Analysis of Meaning-Making and Narrative Reorganization." Journal of Consciousness Studies, vol. 27, no. 7–8, 2020, pp. 122–150.   Carhart-Harris, Robin L., et al. "Neural Correlates of the Psychedelic State as Determined by fMRI Studies with Psilocybin." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 109, no. 6, 2012, pp. 2138–2143.   Carhart-Harris, Robin L., et al. "The Entropic Brain: A Theory of Conscious States Informed by Neuroimaging Research with Psychedelic Drugs." Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, vol. 8, 2014, article 20.   Carhart-Harris, Robin L., et al. "Psilocybin with Psychological Support for Treatment-Resistant Depression: Six-Month Follow-Up." Psychopharmacology, vol. 235, no. 2, 2018, pp. 399–408.   Davis, Alan K., Roland R. Griffiths, and Frederick S. Barrett. "Psychological Flexibility Mediates the Relations between Acute Psychedelic Effects and Subjective Decreases in Depression and Anxiety." Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, vol. 15, 2020, pp. 39–45.   Davis, Alan K., et al. "Effects of Psilocybin-Assisted Therapy on Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial." JAMA Psychiatry, vol. 78, no. 5, 2021, pp. 481–489.   Erritzoe, David, et al. "Effects of Psilocybin Therapy versus Escitalopram on Depression and Emotional Connectedness in Major Depressive Disorder." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 384, 2021, pp. 1402–1411.   Griffiths, Roland R., et al. "Psilocybin Produces Substantial and Sustained Decreases in Depression and Anxiety in Patients with Life-Threatening Cancer: A Randomized Double-Blind Trial." Journal of Psychopharmacology, vol. 30, no. 12, 2016, pp. 1181–1197.   MacLean, Katherine A., Matthew W. Johnson, and Roland R. Griffiths. "Mystical Experiences Occasioned by the Hallucinogen Psilocybin Lead to Increases in the Personality Domain of Openness." Journal of Psychopharmacology, vol. 25, no. 11, 2011, pp. 1453–1461.   Watts, Rosalind, et al. "Patients' Accounts of Increased 'Connectedness' and 'Acceptance' after Psilocybin for Treatment-Resistant Depression." Journal of Humanistic Psychology, vol. 57, no. 5, 2017, pp. 520–564.   Weiss, B., et al. "Associations between Naturalistic Psychedelic Use, Psychological Insight, and Changes in Social Connectedness and Personality." Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, 2021, article 667987. Disclaimer: Trauma Rewired podcast is intended to educate and inform but does not constitute medical, psychological or other professional advice or services. Always consult a qualified medical professional about your specific circumstances before making any decisions based on what you hear. We share our experiences, explore trauma, physical reactions, mental health and disease. If you become distressed by our content, please stop listening and seek professional support when needed. Do not continue to listen if the conversations are having a negative impact on your health and well-being. If you or someone you know is struggling with their mental health, or in mental health crisis and you are in the United States you can 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline.   If someone's life is in danger, immediately call 911.   We do our best to stay current in research, but older episodes are always available. We don't warrant or guarantee that this podcast contains complete, accurate or up-to-date information. It's very important to talk to a medical professional about your individual needs, as we aren't responsible for any actions you take based on the information you hear in this podcast.   We invite guests onto the podcast. Please note that we don't verify the accuracy of their statements. Our organization does not endorse third-party content and the views of our guests do not necessarily represent the views of our organization. We talk about general neuro-science and nervous system health, but you are unique. These are conversations for a wide audience. They are general recommendations and you are always advised to seek personal care for your unique outputs, trauma and needs.   We are not doctors or licensed medical professionals. We are certified neuro-somatic practitioners and nervous system health/embodiment coaches. We are not your doctor or medical professional and do not know you and your unique nervous system. This podcast is not a replacement for working with a professional. The BrainBased.com site and RewireTrial.com is a membership site for general nervous system health, somatic processing and stress processing. It is not a substitute for medical care or the appropriate solution for anyone in a mental health crisis.   Any examples mentioned in this podcast are for illustration purposes only. If they are based on real events, names have been changed to protect the identities of those involved.   We've done our best to ensure our podcast respects the intellectual property rights of others, however if you have an issue with our content, please let us know by emailing us at traumarewired@gmail.com. All rights in our content are reserved.

16 years ago a chain of Chinese restaurants wanted to increase sales without changing the price.  They didn't change the product.  The service.  The chef.  The food.  Instead, they changed two words on their menu and increased sales by 18%.  The restaurants used the advice of today's guest on Nudge, Robert Cialdini.  Today, Cialdini explains the social proof principle, sharing how changing just two words could increase your sales. ---  Unlock the Nudge Vaults: https://www.nudgepodcast.com/vaults Read Cialdini's bestseller Influence: https://amzn.to/4prHb7Y Read the new and expanded Influence: https://amzn.to/43TY0jI Read Pre-Suasion: https://amzn.to/48hA6Qr  Read Yes! (Containing 60 Psyc-Marketing Tips): https://amzn.to/48ddNNf  Join 10,428 readers of my newsletter: https://www.nudgepodcast.com/mailing-list  Connect on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/phill-agnew/  ---  Today's sources:  Aune, R. K., & Basil, M. D. (1994). A relational-obligations approach to fund-raising: The effects of guilt and credibility appeals on compliance. Communication Research, 21(4), 486–498. Binning, K. R., Kaufmann, N., McGreevy, E. M., Fotuhi, O., Chen, S., Marshman, E., Kalender, Z. Y., Limeri, L. B., Betancur, L., & Singh, C. (2020). Changing social contexts to foster equity in college science courses: An ecological-belonging intervention. Psychological Science, 31(9), 1059–1070. Boh, W. F., & Wong, S.-S. (2015). Managers versus co-workers as referents: Comparing social influence effects on within- and outside-subsidiary knowledge sharing. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 126, 1–17. Borman, G. D., Rozek, C. S., Hanselman, P., & Destin, M. (2019). Reappraising academic and social adversity improves middle school students' academic achievement, behavior, and well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(33), 16286–16291. Cai, H., Chen, Y., & Fang, H. (2009). Observational learning: Evidence from a randomized natural field experiment. American Economic Review, 99(3), 864–882. Frank, R. H. (2020). Under the influence: Putting peer pressure to work. Princeton University Press. Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 472–482. Hallsworth, M., List, J. A., Metcalfe, R. D., & Vlaev, I. (2017). The behavioralist as tax collector: Using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance. Journal of Public Economics, 148, 14–31. Jung, J., Busching, R., & Krahé, B. (2019). Catching aggression from one's peers: A longitudinal and multilevel analysis. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(4), e12440. Linder, J. A., Meeker, D., Fox, C. R., Friedberg, M. W., Persell, S. D., Goldstein, N. J., Knight, T. K., Hay, J. W., & Doctor, J. N. (2017). Durability of benefits of behavioral interventions on inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in primary care: Follow-up from a cluster randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 318(14), 1391–1392. Meeker, D., Linder, J. A., Fox, C. R., Friedberg, M. W., Persell, S. D., Goldstein, N. J., Knight, T. K., Hay, J. W., & Doctor, J. N. (2016). Effect of behavioral interventions on inappropriate antibiotic prescribing among primary care practices: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 315(6), 562–570. Murrar, S., Campbell, M. R., & Brauer, M. (2020). Exposure to peers' pro-diversity attitudes increases inclusion and reduces the achievement gap. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(9), 889–897. Nolan, J. M. (2021). Social norm interventions as a tool for pro-climate change. Current Opinion in Psychology, 42, 120–125. Peterson, R. A., Kim, Y., & Jeong, J. (2020). Out-of-stock, sold out, or unavailable? Framing a product outage in online retailing. Psychology & Marketing, 37(4), 535–547.

James-Christian Blockwood is joined by Michael Keegan, host of The Business of Government Hour and Dave Martin, host of The Good Government Show. Michael and Dave have interviewed hundreds of public administrators, government workers, and agency heads in their careers, at every level. What do the best public administrators have in common? Why is storytelling more important to public service workers than it's ever been? And how do we help the best stories find their way to the biggest audiences? Management Matters is a presentation of the National Academy of Public Administration produced by Lizzie Alwan and Matt Hampton and edited by Matt Hampton. Support the Podcast Today at: donate@napawash.org or 202-347-3190Episode music: Hope by Mixaund | https://mixaund.bandcamp.comMusic promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.comFollow us on YouTube for clips and more: @NAPAWASH_YT

Hidden sustainability costs of AI Science Sessions are brief conversations with cutting-edge researchers, National Academy members, and policymakers as they discuss topics relevant to today's scientific community. Learn the behind-the-scenes story of work published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), plus a broad range of scientific news about discoveries that affect the world around us. In this episode, researchers describe the sustainability impact of AI data centers. In this episode, we cover: •[00:00] Introduction •[01:20] Bronis de Supinski describes how the energy demands of AI data centers have increased in recent years and why improvements in data center energy efficiency will not necessarily reduce total energy expenditures •[03:08] Eric Masanet explains the difficulty of tracking and projecting the energy usage of AI data centers. •[05:12] Shaolei Ren describes the water usage and air pollution associated with AI data centers. •[07:30] Tevfik Kosar explains how AI might be leveraged as a tool to help address climate change and sustainability challenges. •[09:00] Final thoughts and conclusion. About Our Guests: Bronis de Supinski  Chief Technology Officer Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory  Eric Masanet  Professor University of California Santa Barbara Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Shaolei Ren  Associate Professor  University of California Riverside Tevfik Kosar  Professor University at Buffalo Follow us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts for more captivating discussions on scientific breakthroughs! Visit Science Sessions on PNAS.org: https://www.pnas.org/about/science-sessions-podcast  Follow PNAS: Twitter/X Facebook LinkedIn YouTube Sign up for the PNAS Highlights newsletter

In this episode of THE MENTORS RADIO, Host Dan Hesse talks with Ginni Rometty, who was the ninth Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of IBM. Under her leadership, the 100-year-old company reinvented 50 percent of its portfolio, built a $25 billion hybrid cloud business, and established leadership in AI and quantum computing.  IBM acquired 65 companies during Ginni's tenure as CEO, including Red Hat, the largest acquisition in the company's history.  She also drove record results in workforce transformation and supported the explosive growth of an innovative high school program to prepare the workforce of the future in over twenty-eight countries.  Through her work with the Business Roundtable, Ginni helped redefine the purpose of the corporation. She has been named Fortune's #1 Most Powerful Woman three years in a row, is a member of the National Academy of Engineering, and has been honored with the designation of Officer in the French Légion of Honor. Today, Ginni Rometty serves on multiple boards and co-chairs OneTen, a coalition committed to upskilling, hiring and promoting one million Americans without four-year degrees by 2030 into family-sustaining jobs and careers. She is the author of the bestselling book Good Power: Creating Positive Change in Our Lives, Work and World, which is full of lessons she learned from important mentors, both inside and outside of IBM.   LISTEN TO the radio broadcast live on iHeart Radio, or to “THE MENTORS RADIO” podcast any time, anywhere, on any podcast platform – subscribe here and don't miss an episode! SHOW NOTES: GINNI ROMETTY: BIO: BIO: Virginia (Ginni) Rometty BOOK: Good Power: Leading Positive Change in Our Lives, Work, and World, by Ginni Rometty WEBSITE: https://ginnirometty.com

Send a textHealthcare has long promised a digital revolution, yet many clinicians feel more burdened than empowered. With AI now accelerating at a rapid pace, can this moment finally deliver on that promise?Dr. Robert Wachter, author of A Giant Leap, joins host John Driscoll to discuss how AI is evolving clinical workflows and decision-making, why "better than human" is good enough in our overburdened system, and the leadership choices that will determine whether AI reduces burnout or deepens healthcare's existing failures.

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/film

Send a textThis week's episode is a very real one for me. I share a life update, the emotional rollercoaster I've been quietly riding, and how I stayed grounded in my program even when my heart and mind were all over the place. If you've been holding it together lately, this episode may feel like a deep exhale. This one is honest, and grounding, especially for those of us managing full lives while trying to live intentionally.Quote of the Week:“The wound is the place where the Light enters you.” — RumiCitations:Raichle, M. E., et al. (2001). A default mode of brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.Gross, J. J., & Levenson, R. W. (1997). Hiding feelings: The acute effects of inhibiting positive and negative emotion. Journal of Abnormal Psychology.Appleton, A. A., et al. (2013). The association of emotional suppression with inflammation and health outcomes. Journal of Psychosomatic Research.Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical Psychology Review.Adam, T. C., & Epel, E. S. (2007). Stress, eating and the reward system. Physiology & Behavior.Let's go, let's get it done. Get more information at: http://projectweightloss.org

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening!

In an age of growing wealth disparities, politicians on both sides of the aisle are sounding the alarm about the fading American Dream. Yet despite all evidence to the contrary, many still view the United States as the land of opportunity. The American Mirage addresses this puzzle by exposing the stark reality of today's media landscape, revealing how popular entertainment media shapes politics and public opinion in an increasingly news-avoiding nation. Drawing on an eclectic array of original data, Dr. Eunji Kim demonstrates how, amid a dazzling array of media choices, many Americans simply are not consuming the news. Instead, millions flock to entertainment programs that showcase real-life success stories, such as American Idol, Shark Tank, and MasterChef. Dr. Kim examines how shows like these leave viewers confoundingly optimistic about the prospects of upward mobility, promoting a false narrative of rugged individualism and meritocracy that contradicts what is being reported in the news. By taking seriously what people casually watch every day, The American Mirage shows how rags-to-riches programs perpetuate the myth of the American Dream, glorifying the economic winners, fostering tolerance for income inequality, and dampening support for redistributive policies that could improve people's lives. Our guest is: Dr. Eunji Kim, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. As a political communication scholar, she primarily studies the impact of media content on mass attitudes and political behavior. She is the author of The American Mirage: How Reality TV Upholds the Myth of Meritocracy. Her research explores a range of topics, and has been published in many leading journals including the American Political Science Review, American Journal of Political Science, Journal of Politics, and Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Our host is: Dr. Christina Gessler, who is a writing coach and editor for academics. She is the creator and producer of the Academic Life podcast, and writes the show's newsletter at ChristinaGessler.Substack.com. Playlist for listeners: Understanding Disinformation 100 Years of Radio in South Africa You Have More Influence Than You Think Black Girls and How We Fail Them Live From The Underground Welcome to Academic Life, the podcast for your academic journey—and beyond! Please join us again to learn from more experts inside and outside the academy, and around the world. Missed any of the 300+ Academic Life episodes? Find them here. And thank you for listening! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/academic-life

Let's say we are unethical people, trying to get ahead in academia and gain accolades for the sake of promotion and income and so forth. In an age where artificial intelligence and LLMs are entering the academic enterprise, has "cheating" changed? Are there new ways of fabricating, fudging, cooking, trimming, and lying about your data, your insights, and your writing? Do we cheat the way we've always cheated, just more effectively and efficiently? Or do we not actually cheat but merely change the rules and norms of scholarship? Tune in and find out. References Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-Ethnography: Synthesising Qualitative Studies. Sage. Locke, K. D., & Golden-Biddle, K. (1997). Constructing Opportunities for Contribution: Structuring Intertextual Coherence and "Problematizing" in Organizational Studies. Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 1023–1062. Recker, J. (2026). The Only Constant is Change: CAIS and the Ever-Evolving World of IS Research and Practice. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 57, forthcoming. Shu, L. L., Mazar, N., Gino, F., Ariely, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2012). RETRACTED: Signing at the Beginning Makes Ethics Salient and Decreases Dishonest Self-Reports in Comparison to Signing at the End. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(38), 15197–15200. Wikipedia. (2025). Ulrich Lichtenthaler. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulrich_Lichtenthaler. Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing After the Results are Known. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(3), 196–217. Andrade, C. (2021). HARKing, Cherry-Picking, P-Hacking, Fishing Expeditions, and Data Dredging and Mining as Questionable Research Practices. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 82(1), 20f13804. von Briel, F., Davidsson, P., & Recker, J. (2026). Why and How Societal Crises Give Rise to Extreme Growth Outliers: A Theory of External Enablement. Academy of Management Review, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2023.0072. Brodeur, A., Carrell, S., Figlio, D., & Lusher, L. (2023). Unpacking P-hacking and Publication Bias. American Economic Review, 113(11), 2974–3002. Dubner, S. J. (2026). If You're Not Cheating, You're Not Trying. Freakonomics Radio, Episode 662, https://freakonomics.com/podcast/if-youre-not-cheating-youre-not-trying/.

What if robots could handle tedious retraction, precise bone milling, or even autonomous suturing, freeing surgeons to focus on complex decision-making and more patients?In this episode of the Succeed In Medicine Podcast, Dr. Bradley Block speaks with Dr. Michael Yip, as he explains that today's robots primarily serve as extensions of human surgeons via teleoperation (e.g., da Vinci for precision in hard-to-reach areas), enhancing dexterity, visualization, and accuracy rather than replacing them. He highlights existing autonomous applications in "hard tissue" procedures like the Mako or Stryker robots for precise bone milling in joint replacements, and non-contact examples like CyberKnife for focused radiation therapy.For soft tissue surgery, the more challenging domain due to tissue deformation and variability, autonomy is emerging in simpler, repetitive tasks such as retraction, suctioning, or basic suturing, with demonstrations dating back 15 years but real-world deployment lagging due to engineering, data, and economic hurdles. Dr. Yip discusses why demos in controlled settings don't easily translate to ORs, the shift to data-driven AI (with risks of out-of-distribution failures), and regulatory challenges like FDA expertise gaps and defining probabilistic safety. He predicts stepwise adoption: starting with assistant-level tasks (replacing med student/intern roles in retraction/suction), then progressing to free surgeons for higher-value work, especially in underserved rural areas via telesurgery. Full "skin-to-skin" autonomy (e.g., simple lipoma excision or appendectomy) remains years away, limited by hardware combining strength, dexterity, and precision in one system, though teams of specialized robots could accelerate progress. Ultimately, robotics will alleviate surgeon burnout from growing demand, not eliminate jobs soon.Three Actionable TakeawaysEmbrace Robotics Early in Training: Surgeons and trainees should gain hands-on experience with diverse robotic technologies now, treating them as essential tools that augment precision and dexterity rather than threats to obsolescence.Focus on Repetitive Tasks for Autonomy Gains: Prioritize robotic assistance in tedious, physically demanding steps like retraction, suctioning, or basic closure to free up time, reduce fatigue, and improve efficiency in high-volume or resource-limited settings.Stay Informed on Regulatory and Economic Shifts: Monitor evolving FDA guidelines for AI/surgical autonomy, economic incentives (e.g., cost savings in joint replacements or anastomosis), and liability frameworks to prepare for integration that enhances patient access and outcomes.About the Show:Succeed In Medicine covers patient interactions, burnout, career growth, personal finance, and more. If you're tired of dull medical lectures, tune in for real-world lessons we should have learned in med school!About the Guest:Dr. Michael Yip is an Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at UC San Diego and Director of the Advanced Robotics and Controls Laboratory (ARCLab). His research focuses on surgical robots, biomimetic design, robot learning, autonomous robotic surgery, and deformable tissue manipulation. He has received the NSF CAREER Award, NIH Trailblazer Award, IEEE RAS Distinguished Lecturer recognition, and was named Faculty Innovator of the Year at UCSD in 2024 and elected to the National Academy of Inventors. Previously a Disney researcher at Amazon Robotics, he holds a BSc in Mechatronics Engineering from the University of Waterloo, MS in Electrical Engineering from the University of British Columbia, and PhD in Bioengineering from Stanford University.Website: yip.eng.ucsd.edu and ucsdarclab.comAbout the Host:Dr. Bradley Block – Dr. Bradley Block is a board-certified otolaryngologist at ENT and Allergy Associates in Garden City, NY. He specializes in adult and pediatric ENT, with interests in sinusitis and obstructive sleep apnea. Dr. Block also hosts Succeed In Medicine podcast, focusing on personal and professional development for physiciansWant to be a guest?Email Brad at brad@physiciansguidetodoctoring.com  or visit www.physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to learn more!Socials:@physiciansguidetodoctoring on Facebook@physicianguidetodoctoring on YouTube@physiciansguide on Instagram and Twitter   This medical podcast is your physician mentor to fill the gaps in your medical education. We cover physician soft skills, charting, interpersonal skills, doctor finance, doctor mental health, medical decisions, physician parenting, physician executive skills, navigating your doctor career, and medical professional development. This is critical CME for physicians, but without the credits (yet). A proud founding member of the Doctor Podcast Network!Visit www.physiciansguidetodoctoring.com to connect, dive deeper, and keep the conversation going. Let's grow! Disclaimer:This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional medical, financial, or legal advice. Always consult a qualified professional for personalized guidance. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode (recorded live), Halle Tecco speaks with Dr. Robert Wachter, Chair of Medicine at UCSF, about their concurrently released books on healthcare innovation and AI.They share thoughts on the dual challenge of innovation in healthcare and the role of AI, covering:Why past waves of tech failed to change healthcare and why AI may finally break throughHow AI is making a difference today in healthcareWhere AI-assisted diagnosis and prescribing could go next, and the risks of over-relying on humans “in the loop” How EHR vendors (like Epic) hold the "poll position" for AI implementation due to workflow integrationWhy innovators must become healthcare "anthropologists"; and clinicians must understand technology and AIPlus, a surprise guest from Prenuvo joins us to chime in. Order Halle's new book, Massively Better Healthcare hereOrder Bob's new book, A Giant Leap here—About our guest: Robert M. Wachter, MD is Professor and Chair of the Department of Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). Author of 300 articles and 6 books, he coined the term “hospitalist” in 1996 and is often considered the “father” of the hospitalist field, the fastest-growing medical specialty in U.S. history. He is a past president of the Society of Hospital Medicine, past chair of the American Board of Internal Medicine, a Master of the American College of Physicians, and an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine. Modern Healthcare magazine has ranked him among the 50 most influential physician-executives in the U.S. more than a dozen times; he was #1 on the list in 2015. His 2015 book, The Digital Doctor: Hope, Hype and Harm at the Dawn of Medicine's Computer Age, was a New York Times bestseller. His new book is A Giant Leap: How AI is Transforming Healthcare and What That Means for Our Future.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Send a textOn this powerful episode, Cornell Bunting sits down with Chief Jason Fields, a dedicated leader who has served the City of Fort Myers since September 2000.Before being appointed Chief of Police in August 2023, Chief Fields rose through the ranks—serving as a Patrol Officer, Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Acting Major, and now Chief. His leadership philosophy centers on intelligence-led, proactive policing, strong community partnerships, and inspiring excellence within his department.Throughout his career, Chief Fields has been deeply involved in SWAT, Internal Affairs, Training, Hiring & Recruiting, Accreditation, and Field Training Programs, bringing experience from every level of service.He holds a Master of Science in Criminal Justice from Hodges University and a Bachelor of Science from International College. He is also a proud graduate of the FBI National Academy (Session 286) and a member of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.In this conversation, Chief Fields opens up about growing up in New York, moving to Florida with his wife and child, and answering his calling to serve in law enforcement. He shares his vision for leading the Fort Myers Police Department in a progressive direction focused on public safety and community trust. Support the showThank you for tuning in with EHAS CLUB - Stories to Create Podcast

In this throwback episode honoring National Women Physicians Day, host Shikha Jain, MD, with Physicianary's Hansa Bhargava, MD, and Mend the Gap's Dagny Zhu, MD, discuss the evolution of empowering yourself and others and advocacy with a panel of guests. ·       Intro 0:32 ·       What does it mean to empower women in medicine, and what are the ways that we can really empower others to achieve the things that they may not see for themselves?  1:37 ·       What are some ways in which you have empowered or hope to empower women in medicine? Are there tips or skills that have worked well?  4:41 ·       How have you been empowered by others, or have helped others find their voices?  7:37 ·       Do you agree that the conversation is changing toward a cultural shift in empowerment for women in health care? 12:23 ·       What are some challenges facing advocacy and empowerment? […] What do you do when your advocacy work is not being received or it is a struggle to speak up for someone?  17:10 ·       Emphasizing the importance of communication in advocacy work. 22:23 ·       Intro to Physicianary's part 3 on physician burnout and work-life balance. 22:51 ·       Thanks for listening 23:31 Be sure to listen to Part 1 and Part 3 of Healio's Women In Medicine roundtable discussion, streaming everywhere now! Vineet Arora, MD, MAPP (NAM), is a Herbert T. Abelson professor of medicine, vice dean of education in the biological sciences division and dean for medical education at the University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine. She is also an elected member of the National Academy of Medicine. She is a founding member of the 501c3 Women of Impact and advisor to the Women in Medicine Summit. Jennifer Bepple, MD, MMCi, is a double board-certified physician in urology and informatics. She is a member of the American Telemedicine Association, American Urologic Association and American Medical Informatics Association and holds a certification from the American Board of Telehealth and the American Board of AI in Medicine. Hansa Bhargava, MD, is Healio's chief clinical strategy and innovation officer. Listen to her Healio podcast, Physicianary. Shikha Jain, MD, FACP, is a board-certified hematology and oncology physician. She is a tenured associate professor of medicine in the division of hematology and oncology, the director of communication strategies in medicine and the associate director of oncology communication & digital innovation at the University of Illinois Cancer Center in Chicago. Mara Schenker, MD, FACS, FAOA, is an orthopedic trauma surgeon at Grady Memorial Hospital. She is double board certified in orthopedic surgery and clinical informatics. She serves as the chief of orthopedics and associate chief medical information officer.  She is an associate professor of orthopedics at Emory University School of Medicine. She serves on multiple boards for medical and digital technology advisory and sits on major national committees for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, AAMC, American College of Surgeons and the Orthopaedic Trauma Association. Dagny Zhu, MD, is a cornea, cataract and refractive surgeon and medical director and partner at NVISION Eye Centers in Rowland Heights, CA. She can be reached on X @DZEyeMD. Listen to her on Healio's Mend The Gap: Equity In Medicine podcast. We'd love to hear from you! Send your comments/questions to Dr. Jain at oncologyoverdrive@healio.com. Follow Healio on X and LinkedIn: @HemOncToday and https://www.linkedin.com/company/hemonctoday/. Follow Dr. Jain on X: @ShikhaJainMD. Disclosures: The hosts and guests report no relevant financial disclosures.

Medicare for all. Not socialized medicine, just a single, government-run system that provides healthcare.  Is it possible? Or even viable? Our guest this week on the Creating a New Healthcare podcast believes so. In fact, he sees it as the only way to ultimately address the affordability problem with healthcare, particularly for high cost conditions like cancer. In today's episode, we talk with Dr. Troy Brennan about his book, The Transformation of American Health Insurance: On the Path to Medicare for All, and why a single payer, government system is needed, and how the changes the current administration has made to our public health systems is taking us backwards, not forward. Troyen Brennan is an Adjunct Professor at Harvard Chan School of Public Health.  He was formerly the Executive Vice President and Chief Medical Officer for CVS Health and Aetna. Before that, he was the President of the Brigham and Women's Physician Organization and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School.  He was also Professor of Law and Public Health at the Harvard Chan School of Public Health.  Brennan was formerly the Chair of the American Board of Internal Medicine and is a member of the National Academy of Medicine. He has published six books and over 600 articles. 

For the fourth and final episode of our collaboration with Wetlands Radio, a series about coastal restoration: ways we can all help repair our coast. So...what does a bottle of Two Buck Chuck and slinging back oysters have to do with building land? Find out how one man's trash transforms into coastal treasures. And then, to close out the series on coastal restoration, we learn about the crown jewel of Louisiana science: a research project that exemplifies how everything is connected. EPISODE CREDITSThis episode was hosted by Executive Producer Carlyle Calhoun and Wetlands Radio producer Eve Abrams. Wetlands Radio is produced by Eve Abrams and funded by BTNEP, the Barataria Terrebonne National Estuary Program through the Environmental Protection Agency's National Estuary Program. To hear Wetlands Radio episodes in their entirety, visit btnep.org. Sea Change is a WWNO and WRKF production. We are part of the NPR Podcast Network and distributed by PRX. Sea Change is made possible with major support from the Gulf Research Program of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Sea Change is also supported by the Water Collaborative of Greater New Orleans. WWNO's Coastal Desk is supported by the Walton Family Foundation, the Meraux Foundation, and the Greater New Orleans Foundation. 

Physicians now face a world where search bars, chat apps, and large AI models are becoming many people's first stop for health questions, long before they enter a clinic.Former Google Chief Health Officer and national health IT leader Dr. Karen DeSalvo joins us to unpack what this shift means for clinicians, regulators, and patients, and why 15% of daily Google searches are questions no one has ever asked before.We cover:• Why consumer health search is becoming a powerful entry point into care• How Google built guardrails for safety, quality, and real-time monitoring of emerging risks• What the rise of GenAI “doctor in your pocket” tools could mean• The regulatory tensions ahead as states experiment with AI-driven medical decision support• How global demand, workforce strain, and new data sources (IoT, at-home diagnostics, wearables) are accelerating AI-supported primary care—About our guest: Dr. Karen DeSalvo is a health leader who has committed her career to improving health for everyone, everywhere. She was most recently Google's Chief Health Officer, where spearheaded a global team of health professionals dedicated to harnessing Google's technology and platforms to help everyone, everywhere live a longer, healthier life. Before Google, Dr. DeSalvo held significant roles in the U.S. government, including National Coordinator for Health Information Technology and acting Assistant Secretary for Health. She was also the Health Commissioner in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina, where she led public health recovery efforts. Dr. DeSalvo currently sits on the Boards of Directors for Welltower and CityBlock Health and is a member of the Council of the National Academy of Medicine. —Pre-order Halle's new book, Massively Better Healthcare.—

We have been taught to wait as a measure of professionalism. We delay rest, joy, and alignment because medicine taught us that patience equals commitment. Many of us are still waiting long after training ends, hoping the system will change. This waiting can feel loyal, responsible, even virtuous. Over time, it quietly costs us our presence, our health, and our lives. PEARLS OF WISDOM • Waiting is not neutral. It often preserves systems that rely on our overfunctioning and silence. • Many of us are not waiting because it is right, but because we were trained to believe it is required. • The system is not always broken; sometimes it is functioning exactly as designed. • Agency begins when we stop waiting for permission and choose alignment, even in small ways. • Fear often shows up when we stop waiting, and fear does not mean we are wrong. Reflection Questions: Where in our lives have we normalized waiting that no longer feels aligned? What are we postponing because we believe now is not the right time? What might become possible if we stopped waiting for permission? Who benefits from our waiting, and who bears the cost? CLOSING INVITATION This conversation is not about leaving medicine. It is about staying in medicine without disappearing ourselves in the process. Many of us were trained to endure quietly and trust that relief would come later. What we are exploring instead is the possibility of choosing ourselves now, even gently and imperfectly. Coaching and retreat spaces are one way we practice this shift together.  Not to fix ourselves, but to remember that our lives matter now, not someday. We are allowed to live full lives alongside meaningful work. If coaching, a retreat, or an intentional pause feels supportive, notice what comes up when you consider not waiting. Often, the only thing standing between us and alignment is the permission we can give ourselves. Find out about 1:1 coaching with Dr. Jessie Mahoney: Learn about Jessie's small group coaching programs: www.jessiemahoneymd.com/group-coaching Join Jessie at Nicaiso Creek Farm CME Wellness Retreats for Women Physicians  or   Jessie & Ni-Cheng at the COED Connect in Nature Mindfulness Retreat at Green Gulch Farm and Zen Center. www.jessiemahoneymd.com/retreats *Nothing shared in the Healing Medicine Podcast is medical advice. Other useful links to explore: • National Academy of Medicine – Clinician Well-Being https://nam.edu/initiatives/clinician-resilience-and-well-being/ • University of Arizona Integrative Medicine https://integrativemedicine.arizona.edu  

In a rare departure from our usual diet of online weirdos, this episode features an academic who is very much not a guru. We're joined by Julia Rohrer, a psychologist at Leipzig University whose work straddles the disciplinary boundaries of open science, research transparency, and causal inference. Julia is also an editor at Psychological Science and has spent much of the last decade politely pointing out that psychologists often don't quite know what they're estimating, why, or under which assumptions.We talk about the state of psychology after the replication crisis, whether open science reforms have genuinely improved research practice (or just added new boxes to tick), and why causal thinking is unavoidable even when researchers insist they are “only describing associations.” Julia explains why the standard dance of imply causality → deny causality → add boilerplate disclaimer is unhelpful, and argues instead for being explicit about the causal questions researchers actually care about and the assumptions required to answer them.Along the way we discuss images of scientists in the public and amongst the gurus, how post-treatment bias sneaks into even well-intentioned experimental designs, why specifying the estimand matters more than running ever-fancier models, and how psychology's current norms can potentially punish honesty about uncertainty. We also touch on her work on birth-order effects and offer some possible reasons for optimism.With all the guru talk, people sometimes ask us to recommend things that we like, and Julia's work is one such example!LinksJulia Rohrer's websiteThe 100% CI blogRohrer, J. M. (2024). Causal inference for psychologists who think that causal inference is not for them. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 18(3), e12948.Rohrer, J. M., Tierney, W., Uhlmann, E. L., DeBruine, L. M., Heyman, T., Jones, B., ... & Yarkoni, T. (2021). Putting the self in self-correction: Findings from the loss-of-confidence project. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1255-1269.Rohrer, J. M., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2015). Examining the effects of birth order on personality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(46), 14224-14229.BEMC MAY 2024 - Julia Rohrer - "Causal confusions correlate with casual conclusions"Dr. Tobias Dienlin - Less casual causal inference for experiments and longitudinal data: Research talk by Julia Rohrer