Search for: All records

Objective: Identify the role(s) and support(s), if any, that family members provide to first-generation and historically marginalized doctoral students, including strengths and challenges of this support. Background: Nonfinancial family support is important for the success and retention of first-generation and historically marginalized graduate students. More empirical studies of the role(s) and support of family members of these doctoral students are needed. Method: During an intervention designed for firstgeneration and historically marginalized doctoral students and their families, we conducted four focus groups with doctoral students (n = 22) and three focus groups with the family members they chose to accompany them (n = 15). Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Two themes emerged from the data: support and connection. In addition to providing distinct types of support, families play both supportive and connective roles. There are challenges to family roles and support in areas such as communication, doctoral student stress, and different ways that family members and doctoral students think about and approach life. Conclusion: The study provided key insights to understanding the roles and support of family of doctoral students; more efforts are needed across graduate schools in the United States. Implications: Family science faculty and graduate schools may collaborate to provide meaningful interventions for graduate students and their families for the goal of promoting graduate student retention and success. 

This paper examines strategies for making misinformation interventions responsive to four communities of color. Using qualitative focus groups with members of four non-profit organizations, we worked with community leaders to identify misinformation narratives, sources of exposure, and effective intervention strategies in the Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI), Black, Latino, and Native American communities. Analyzing the findings from those focus groups, we identified several pathways through which misinformation prevention efforts can be more equitable and effective. Building from our findings, we propose steps practitioners, academics, and policymakers can take to better address the misinformation crisis within communities of color. We illustrate how these recommendations can be put into practice through examples from workshops co-designed with a non-profit working on disinformation and media literacy. 

The naked mole-rat (Heterocephalus glaber) has fascinated zoologists for at least half a century. It has also generated considerable biomedical interest not only because of its extraordinary longevity, but also because of unusual protective features (e.g. its tolerance of variable oxygen availability), which may be pertinent to several human disease states, including ischemia/reperfusion injury and neurodegeneration. A recent article entitled 'Surprisingly long survival of premature conclusions about naked mole-rat biology' described 28 'myths' which, those authors claimed, are a 'perpetuation of beautiful, but falsified, hypotheses' and impede our understanding of this enigmatic mammal. Here, we re-examine each of these 'myths' based on evidence published in the scientific literature. Following Braude et al., we argue that these 'myths' fall into four main categories: (i) 'myths' that would be better described as oversimplifications, some of which persist solely in the popular press; (ii) 'myths' that are based on incomplete understanding, where more evidence is clearly needed; (iii) 'myths' where the accumulation of evidence over the years has led to a revision in interpretation, but where there is no significant disagreement among scientists currently working in the field; (iv) 'myths' where there is a genuine difference in opinion among active researchers, based on alternative interpretations of the available evidence. The term 'myth' is particularly inappropriate when applied to competing, evidence-based hypotheses, which form part of the normal evolution of scientific knowledge. Here, we provide a comprehensive critical review of naked mole-rat biology and attempt to clarify some of these misconceptions.