Monday, October 5, 2026

How Heavily Are PhD Students Offloading Their Scientific Writing to AI?

Large language models are diffusing rapidly into science, raising concerns that delegating research writing to AI may undermine the development of expertise that scientific training is supposed to build. 

This study measures AI-generated writing in the dissertations of a near-census of US STEM PhD graduates from 2019 to 2026 and link graduates to their subsequent employment. AI writing is absent before 2023, present in 29% of dissertations filed in 2026, and rapidly growing. Use is more common among students from non-English-speaking countries and at lower-ranked programs. 

Among graduates in the same program and cohort, those whose dissertations contain AI writing are less likely to enter academic research careers and more likely to enter non-tenure-track roles or industry, with this pattern strongest among US-origin students. At the same time as AI may increase research productivity, it thus appears to also be displacing a potentially important portion of the work through which scientific expertise is developed.

Early Investments in Parents Buffer Against Future Schooling Shocks

 Do early investments in parents pay off even when treatment effects for children appear to fade out quickly? This study answers that question by leveraging a field experiment in which households with 3-5 year-old children were randomized into a parenting program, a preschool, or a control group, combined with a natural experiment (Covid-19 school closures) that occurred ten years later. 

Prior to the closures, treatment effects on academic achievement had faded to zero across all groups. Yet, with Covid-19 school closures, effects of the parenting program re-emerge: test scores in control and preschool groups drop by roughly 0.25-0.30 SD, whereas scores in the parenting group drop by only 0.11 SD (difference: p = 0.01). 

These findings suggest that parenting programs can generate latent human capital that only becomes visible when complementary school inputs are removed. This result is consonant with parental and school investments acting as substitutes in skill production. Because this latent parental capacity pays off precisely when school inputs fail, standard measurement tools for early childhood programs can miss crucial state-contingent value.

Impacts of Targeted Acceleration in Middle School Math

This study focuses on an accelerated 3-year math curriculum offered in the middle schools of a large urban district that enables students to finish Algebra I and Geometry before high school. Entry to the program is based on 5th-grade math test scores, with a cutoff at the 80th percentile. Continuing eligibility requires at least a B grade in the previous year; successful completion of all three years is highly correlated with an index of non-cognitive skills. 

Following students for 6 years after high school graduation, the authors find that the impacts of admission vary widely by non-cognitive skill and gender. Marginally eligible boys with high non-cognitive skills have a 33 percentage point (ppt.) increase in the probability of completing calculus by 11th grade and a 12 ppt. increase in the probability of completing a major in STEM or business within 6 years; boys with lower noncognitive skills take more advanced math classes in high school but have no significant effects on their college outcomes. 

Like their male peers, marginally eligible girls with high non-cognitive skills are more likely to complete calculus by 11th grade (+17 ppt.). Their rate of graduating with a STEM or business major is unaffected, but they switch from social sciences to the core STEM majors (science, engineering and math). Girls in the two lower terciles of non-cognitive skill are also strongly affected by entry to the program, with higher participation in advanced math classes in high school, higher rates of entry to selective 4-year colleges, and higher rates of completing a STEM or business major (+12 ppt).

Friday, October 2, 2026

Simply telling teenagers ‘just don’t send nudes’ does not work

 Blunt warnings telling teenagers not to share sexual images are failing to protect them and can make victims of image-based sexual abuse feel blamed, ashamed and unable to seek help, according to new research from the University of Surrey. 

The study, published in Sexualities, found that current responses from schools, safeguarding services and the justice system are often fragmented, punitive and poorly equipped to address rapidly evolving threats such as sexual deepfakes and sextortion (blackmail involving sexual images). 

Researchers argue that blanket ‘just say no’ messages ignore the reality that image-sharing can form part of young people’s relationships, intimacy and social lives. By treating all sharing in the same way, these approaches can shift responsibility onto victims rather than those who violate consent. 

The research reviewed existing evidence alongside insights from a 2025 workshop involving 38 professionals from education, law enforcement, frontline services, academia, policy and the technology sector. 

Participants reported that institutions can focus more heavily on confiscating devices, preserving evidence or protecting their reputations than addressing the emotional and social harm experienced by young people. Confusing legal and safeguarding frameworks can also mean the same incident could betreated as a consensual exchange, a safeguarding concern or a criminal offence depending on who handles it. 

Dr Emily Setty, Associate Professor in Criminology at the University of Surrey, said: 

“Telling young people to ‘just don’t send nudes’ is no longer a credible safeguarding response. It ignores how digital intimacy actually works and places the burden of preventing abuse on potential victims. With AI-generated images, a young person can now be targeted even when they have never created or shared an intimate image.” 

Researchers propose an approach called ‘safe uncertainty’, which allows professionals to act decisively while considering the circumstances, relationships and needs involved in each case. Rather than relying only on rigid rules or checklists, schools and safeguarding services would examine issues such as coercion, breached trust, shame, peer pressure and the young person’s emotional safety. 

Dr Setty continued: 

“Young people who disclose abuse need to be met with care, not suspicion or a lecture about their choices. Schools and safeguarding professionals must be able to respond to the harm in front of them, even when a case does not fit neatly into an existing category. The priority should be restoring safety, dignity and trust.” 


Primary school pupils who use an AI-supported learning tool learn arithmetic more quickly

Primary school pupils who use an AI-supported learning tool learn arithmetic more quickly than children who do not use such a tool. This is the finding of a multi-year study by Radboud University involving nearly eight thousand children. However, the researchers warn that it's no miracle cure, as the teacher’s role remains essential even with AI.

The researchers examined the development of numeracy skills among 7,885 Dutch primary school pupils over a three-year period, when these systems were first used between 2014 and 2017. They compared classes that used an adaptive learning system with classes that taught numeracy without such a system. Such a system automatically adapts exercises to the level of an individual pupil. Pupils are given more difficult tasks if they perform well and simpler tasks if they get stuck. On average, pupils who used the system showed more positive growth in their maths performance over the years.

Large-scale study

‘It is one of the first studies to examine the long-term effects of adaptive learning tools. Until now, research into these kinds of systems has mainly focused on short-term effects, or has been conducted on a smaller scale,’ explains Susanne de Mooij, an education researcher and one of the study’s authors.

‘Adaptive learning systems have been in use for almost fifteen years in more than half of all Dutch primary schools. Nevertheless, some fear that this type of adaptive learning tool leads to pupils learning less effectively, as digital learning materials are thought to be less effective than paper-based ones. This study shows that, in cognitive terms at least, this is not the case.’

Greater success at large schools

The effects found are modest, De Mooij emphasises. ‘We have found small effects, but generally a positive trend. Moreover, the positive effect is particularly evident in large schools and in vulnerable schools with many pupils from less advantaged socio-economic backgrounds. There is often greater variation between pupils in such settings. Adaptive technology can then help to better tailor teaching to individual needs,’ says De Mooij.

This means that an adaptive learning tool is primarily something that supports teachers, rather than replacing them. ‘A teacher cannot adapt the lesson content to thirty pupils at the same time. But with a tool like this, you can improve pupils’ maths skills whilst also reducing a teacher’s workload.’ The researchers emphasise that the teacher always remains in control: ‘The teacher draws up the lesson plan, decides what pupils learn and oversees what happens in the classroom. Such learning technology is fed solely by the data stored in the system, whereas a teacher has access to much more information.’

Busy college students less likely to be depressed, and get better grades

 When it comes to mental health, it may not be how much time you have that matters, but rather, how you feel about the time you have.

That’s one key takeaway of a new University of Colorado Boulder study examining the relationship between time and mental health.

The study of 646 undergraduates, published in the Journal of American College Health, found that those with the busiest schedules were significantly less likely to be depressed, and—contrary to some common assumptions—they got better grades. Those who felt a chronic sense of rush or “time pressure” had higher rates of anxiety and depression, regardless of what their schedules looked like.

Additionally, those who scored higher on measures of mindfulness (the ability to be present and aware in the moment) appeared to be able to take on a heftier schedule without compromising their mental health.

“We have a tendency to think, ‘Oh, things will get better, and I won’t be stressed if I can just take some things off of my plate,’” said first author Caitlin McKimmy, a doctoral candidate in the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience. “These data show that it’s not that simple — that outside of what is actually on our calendar we need to heal our relationship with time.”

Time pressure vs. time scarcity

Previous research shows that people can experience time differently, depending on what they’re doing with it.

One study found that people who give their time away, through things like volunteering or helping friends, tend to feel less stressed about time than those who spend time on themselves or waste time. Other research has shown that when someone is fully immersed in a task they care about, also known as a “flow state,” time seems to speed by.

Deep breathing and other mindfulness practices have been shown to increase one’s sense that their time is abundant.

For the new study, McKimmy, a busy mother of two, wanted to examine the impact of two distinct elements of time: “time pressure” (or the subjective sense of rush); and “time scarcity” (the objective lack of non-committed hours).

In her survey, she gathered data on how many hours per week the student participants spent in class, preparing for class, working a job, commuting and doing other activities. Survey questions also assessed how much time pressure they felt, how anxious or depressed they were and their level of mindfulness.

The participants agreed to provide their GPAs and access to their academic records.

McKimmy was surprised to find that time scarcity was strongly associated with both better grades and lower rates of depression.  Heightened time pressure, on the other hand, was strongly associated with more anxiety, depression and lower grades.

Importantly, those short on time didn’t necessarily feel time pressure.

“You can have a very busy person who has a harmonious relationship with time and someone else who, objectively speaking, has a calendar with some space in it but is really stressed out about time,” McKimmy said.

When asked what they would do with it if they did have more time, students listed self-care, including mental healthcare, as No. 1.

What causes what?

McKimmy stresses that the findings don’t prove that staying busy causes people to be happier. It could be that those with better mental health naturally seek out more experiences while those struggling with low mood say no more. There could also be shared underlying factors that influence both how someone perceives time and their mental health. For instance, some research suggests that depression itself can influence perception of time, potentially making it feel unmanageable.

What we can infer from these data, she said, is that the common less-is-more narrative may not always hold.

For instance, while a student might be inclined to skip taking a part-time job, for fear it might hurt their GPA, the study found no evidence that adding more to a schedule will hurt academic performance or mental health. While someone might retreat socially when their grades or work start to slip, this could potentially backfire, leading to a monotonous schedule—that can make time crawl by—and a sense of loneliness, warns McKimmy.

“These data support the idea that doing more and being engaged can not only lead to better mental health but could also support academic and professional success,” she said.

This is not to say that there’s no such thing as being overscheduled, she stressed. Often, for reasons they can’t control, people have less free time than is ideal.

Notably, the study showed that people who scored higher on measures of mindfulness had less negative mental health impacts when they were stressed about time.

“There appears to be something about attuning to the present moment that protects you against the negative impact of time pressure,” she said.

Her advice to those feeling stressed about their schedule: If you must fill it, try to fill it with things in line with your passions and values; try to be in the moment, not thinking about the future or past.

If you notice you are feeling stressed, take a moment to focus on your breath and ground yourself in your body and in the moment.

“The amount of time we have in our week isn’t super malleable,” she said. “But the way we think about time is.”

***

Parenting profiles and children's behavioral and emotional problems

 

Certain parenting approaches, such as lower supervision and inconsistent discipline, are associated with a higher likelihood that children will show behavioral and emotional problems, such as attention difficulties, anxiety, and depression


There's no one right way to raise a child, but different patterns of parenting are associated with how kids behave. A new study, published on September 30, 2026 in the open access journal PLOS One, identified data-driven profiles of parenting practices and investigated how these relate to children's behavioral and emotional problems, generally grouped into internalizing behaviors (e.g., withdrawal, anxiety, depression) and externalizing behaviors (e.g., aggression, oppositional behavior, attention problems). The research team led by Dr. Xiaoye Xu, an Assistant Professor of Psychology at SUNY Cortland, US, found that several parenting factors, including low supervision and inconsistent discipline, were linked to a higher likelihood that children would exhibit these behaviors.

The researchers assessed these behaviors in more than 2,700 children between the ages of five and 18, using data assembled by the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) Environmental influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) Program. Parents filled out surveys about their approach to parenting and their children's behavior.

Across these responses, the researchers identified three parenting profiles. The first was high positive parenting with better supervision — the term "positive parenting" describes warm, responsive caregiving, such as praising good behavior and engaging supportively with the child. The other two profiles were lower positive parenting with medium supervision, and medium positive parenting with poorer supervision. While these profiles do not represent the full spectrum of parenting approaches, this range let the researchers analyze the effects of positive parenting and level of supervision together.

Externalizing and internalizing behaviors were lowest among children raised with high positive parenting and better supervision. These behaviors were more common in the lower positive parenting with medium supervision profile, and highest among children in the medium positive parenting with poorer supervision profile.

Separately, the researchers also examined each parenting behavior individually rather than as part of a broader profile. This analysis showed that inconsistent discipline — how unpredictably parents enforced rules — was linked to both more internalizing and more externalizing problems, regardless of a family's broader parenting profile. Poor supervision, examined this way, was linked to more externalizing problems specifically, such as aggression and attention difficulties, but was not significantly linked to internalizing problems like anxiety and depression.

The results of this study do not give a full picture of a child's rearing and its possible influences. The data are based on self-report — mostly mothers filled out the survey, with only 52 fathers participating, and other family or community members involved in the child's rearing were not included. The researchers also only had a snapshot of the current parent-child relationship, which makes it difficult to establish cause and effect, as both parenting tactics and child behavior can develop and change in response to one another.

The authors add: “In a large, diverse sample of children across the US, we found that certain patterns of parenting – not just individual behaviors – matter for children's emotional and behavioral wellbeing. Children tended to have fewer emotional and behavioral problems when parents were consistently positive, provided steady discipline, and stayed closely engaged in their day-to-day lives. It's a reminder that small, everyday parenting behaviors can add up to meaningful differences for children.”

 The freely available article in PLOS One: https://plos.io/4rdE7OQ