Letters from the Director

Letter from the Director: April 2025

By ajk90April 7th, 2025in Homepage, Letters From the Director

Do Something...

By: Michelle Amazeen

In February, I joined a panel hosted by Boston University’s Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies titled “Politics by Non-Politicians: Elon Musk, Social Media, and the 21st-Century Election Landscape.”

Banner in the style of 1940's Rosie the Riveter with a woman holding a megaphone beneath the text Do Something...

During the Q&A, a student named Aiden asked a question that has stayed with me ever since:

“I was born in 2002. I was six years old in 2008, so I don’t remember the financial crisis. I don’t remember Occupy Wall Street. When I was 13 or 14, I was entering high school when Trump was elected. And so, all I’ve known of this country is instability and horror. It seems like a fallacy that we have any power as young people…what is the point of continuing to care, and if we continue to care, does that mean we have power, and if so, where can we actually apply it, because to me, it doesn’t seem like we do.”

Aiden’s question was raw, honest, and, sadly, not unique. I’ve heard many variations of this from students over the past few months—bright, thoughtful young people who are wondering whether their voices matter in a world that feels like it’s spiraling.

So to Aiden—and to everyone who has asked a similar question—let me start with this:
Your voice absolutely matters.

Context: Yes, Things Are Bad. But This Isn’t the First Time.

There’s no question we’re in a turbulent time. Government investment in scientific research is being slashed, tariffs are straining relationships with allies, and the U.S. has withdrawn from the Paris Agreement. Misinformation is rampant. Political polarization is deepening. There are real threats to democratic norms.

But this isn’t the first time young Americans have lived through chaos—or shaped what came next.

During the U.S. Civil War, young people served as soldiers, nurses, and supporters on the home front. In the Industrial Revolution and Progressive Era, they pushed for labor reforms, women’s suffrage, and education rights. Students led protests during the Civil Rights Movement, the Vietnam War, and the fight against apartheid in South Africa.

Today’s world may feel unprecedented, but history reminds us: young people have always been at the forefront of change.

Today’s Changemakers

Greta Thunberg began striking for climate action outside the Swedish parliament at age 15. She has since galvanized a global youth movement, reshaped public discourse, and pressured governments to act.
And in December 2024, the Montana Supreme Court upheld the rights of 16 young plaintiffs who argued that the state’s support for fossil fuels violated their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment. They won.

These aren’t anomalies. They’re proof that passion and persistence—especially from young people—can make a tangible difference.

Yes, There Are Risks

Getting involved isn’t always safe. History is full of reminders of this—from the students beaten on the Edmund Pettus Bridge during the Civil Rights Movement, to those killed at Kent State protesting the Vietnam War. Today, some international students who’ve attended pro-Palestinian protests are facing deportation.

But not getting involved carries a risk, too: the risk of leaving the future in someone else’s hands.

Cynicism and apathy don’t just arise from despair—they’re often the goal. Chaos breeds confusion. Confusion breeds disengagement. And disengagement leaves power unchallenged.

Understanding Media Power

One of the most powerful—and accessible—ways to push back is by engaging critically with the information we consume and share.

Young people today are increasingly getting their news from social media, especially TikTok. But much of that content is shaped by influencers—often male and conservative—and lacks the journalistic standards of verification, context, and accountability.

Foreign state actors are creating fake news sites and paying influencers to subtly shift public opinion. This is not conspiracy; it’s a documented strategy.

Want to make a difference? Start by protecting the integrity of our media ecosystem:

Other Ways to Take Action

There are many entry points. One great resource is Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan nonprofit focused on preventing authoritarianism and strengthening democratic institutions. Their guide outlines tangible ways you can get involved—at any level and any age—including:

  • Staying informed
  • Voting (and helping others register and vote)
  • Running for local office
  • Educating your peers
  • Practicing self-care and building community

Final Word: To All the Aidens Out There

Your voice and actions do matter. And they always have.

You don’t need to change the world overnight. But by staying informed, standing up for your values, and supporting others who are doing the same, you’re already reshaping the world around you.

Use your voice. Use your tools. Use your power.

Because despite the noise, despite the fear, despite the cynicism—you do have it.
And we need it now more than ever.

 

###

Image Credit: ChatGPT

Letter from the Director: January 2025

By ajk90January 28th, 2025in Homepage, Letters From the Director

Americans Expect Social Media Content Moderation

By: Michelle Amazeen

In an age where misinformation spreads at the speed of a click, the announcement by Meta—formerly Facebook—to abandon its partnership with independent fact-checking organizations raises urgent questions. Meta’s decision comes at a critical juncture, as the U.S. faces an era where disinformation campaigns—often amplified by political figures—threaten democratic discourse and public trust. How will this shift affect the quality of content on its platforms? And, as Meta is the largest funder of fact-checkers globally, what does this mean for the future of fact-checking itself?

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg justified the decision by claiming that the company’s fact-checking program “too often became a tool to censor.” Yet, a recent poll from Boston University’s College of Communication paints a very different picture of public sentiment. A majority (72%) of Americans believe it is acceptable for social media platforms to remove inaccurate information about public health issues. Support spans political divides, with 85% of Democrats, 70% of Independents, and even 61% of Republicans agreeing that such content moderation is necessary.

Instead of relying on independent fact-checkers, Meta is pivoting to a “community notes” model. In this approach, users write and rate notes that accompany posts containing dubious claims. This model mirrors the approach Elon Musk has implemented on Twitter, now rebranded as X.

But Americans remain skeptical. The same poll reveals that nearly two in three adults (63%) believe independent fact-checking organizations should verify social media content. In contrast, less than half (48%) support the “community notes” model. Although there are some partisan differences—73% of Democrats, 62% of Independents, and 55% of Republicans favor a fact-checking model—the lukewarm reception of community notes crosses party lines.

Is there any evidence that crowdsourcing claim verification works? The academic literature is mixed. In certain contexts, crowdsourcing can rival expert verification. However, other research highlights its inconsistencies. Crowdsourcing is generally effective at assessing the credibility of news sources but struggles to reliably identify disinformation. Partisanship often undermines its efficacy, influencing which claims are selected for verification. Moreover, distinguishing verifiable claims from unverifiable ones is a skill that typically requires training.

Black and white photo of a hand dropping a ballot into a ballot box.

In practice, the results are sobering. Despite the presence of the community notes program, X remains a platform rife with misinformation on elections, climate change, and other critical topics. Offloading content moderation responsibilities onto users is yet another example of platforms shirking their duty to ensure the safety of their digital products. By abandoning content moderation, social media platforms risk enabling disinformation from those in power. Accountability measures are essential, especially as a new administration with a history of weaponizing disinformation takes office.

Still, paying independent fact-checkers has its own complications. Under Meta’s program, the platform itself determined which claims were submitted for review. This approach often resulted in fact-checkers debunking viral but non-political content, while more politically charged claims that could influence democratic processes went unaddressed. Additionally, Meta did not disclose what happened to posts flagged as inaccurate, leaving fact-checkers in the dark about the impact of their work.

Thus, the silver lining in Meta’s rejection of fact-checkers may be that the commercial imperatives of the company will no longer influence fact-checker claim selection process. Freed from Meta’s influence, fact-checkers might return their focus to democratic priorities. However, the financial loss will undoubtedly strain these organizations.

There is a potential bright side: the public could play a pivotal role in sustaining independent fact-checking. According to the Boston University poll, one-third of U.S. adults would donate $1 to fund these initiatives through crowdfunding campaigns. Such efforts could restore some of the financial resources that fact-checking organizations need to thrive.

The question of who should moderate social media content—and how—is a critical challenge of the digital age. As political leaders test the limits of truth, the integrity of public discourse hangs in the balance. Social media platforms must rise to the occasion, for their role in shaping the national conversation has never been more consequential.

Michelle A. Amazeen is Associate Professor of Mass Communication at Boston University, Associate Dean for Research at the College of Communication and directs the Communication Research Center.

Letter from the Director: December 2024

By ajk90December 17th, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

The Fall 2024 Semester in Review

By: Michelle Amazeen

December marks the conclusion of another bustling semester for the CRC which kicked off with our inaugural open house co-hosted with the Center for Innovation in Social Science. We also celebrated the 15-year milestone of our Colloquium Series, which consists of monthly research presentations that highlight current and original research of CRC fellows. Our fall speakers included Dr. Denis Wu (September), Dr. Chris Wells (November), and Dr. Maria “Betsi” Grabe (December).

An image of faculty from BU's School of Hospitality and the CRC Lab Manager, Amanda King, prepping a graduate student for biometric data collection.
A graduate student being prepped for biometric data collection by the CRC Lab Manager, while a faculty member looks on, pictured here.

Every semester, the CRC invites a distinguished scholar from outside the university to share their outstanding scholarship, expertise, and experience with the BU community. Our Fall 2024 Dr. Melvin L. DeFleur Distinguished Lecturer was Dr. Bartosz Wojdynski (University of Georgia) who spoke about deepfakes, AI images, and the psychology of detection. We were thrilled to welcome nearly 200 attendees from the BU community and from other universities in the Boston area.

To foster connections within our research community, our faculty fellows met monthly as part of our Work-In-Progress meetings. Special guests this semester included representatives from BU’s Institutional Review Board and from the office of BU’s Foundation Relations. We will continue these meetings in the spring semester on the first Thursday of the month at 3:30 pm. Our first meeting will be February 6th. Moreover, our Lunch & Learn series continued, enabling doctoral students the opportunity to talk with scholars such as Edward Schiappa, Ph.D, Arunima Krishna, Ph.D, Maria Grabe, Ph.D, and Katy Coduto, Ph.D, about their academic research and careers.

We concluded the semester with an onsite workshop focused on training faculty fellows on our biometric technology. Led by an iMotions Product Specialist, the workshop offered an introduction to the iMotions software, theoretical insights into neuroscience and voice analysis, and practical, hands-on experience with the hardware and software required for conducting in-depth analyses with these tools. If you are interested in learning more about biometrics, short primers are available here and here.

Given the University’s commitment to involving students in research, the CRC continued to facilitate fellows’ efforts to recruit students as research participants via our SONA research participant management system. SONA provides both graduate and undergraduate students with the opportunity to engage in various research activities across COM while earning course credit. This semester, students from 42 different COM courses had access to 26 research opportunities. Faculty fellows (or their advisees) who utilize CRC resources are required to register their courses with SONA. We encourage you to consider including your courses in the upcoming Spring semester. To enroll, please complete this form. For more details about the SONA program, visit our website or email us comsona@bu.edu.

Michelle Amazeen, Ph.D, Tammy Vigil, Ph.D, and Charlotte Howell, Ph.D photographed in the podcast studio.
All smiles following the first recording of 'The COMversation' with Michelle Amazeen, Ph.D (left), Tammy Vigil, Ph.D (center), and Charlotte Howell, Ph.D (right), pictured here.

The CRC also sought to advance the thought leadership of its fellows with the Media & Technology Public Opinion Poll. In August, Prof. Anne Danehy lent her expertise to a poll about candidate imagery: Democrats’ Convention Knocked Trump’s Image Among Independents, Survey Suggests. Our September poll addressed social media warning labels that corresponded to research from Dr. Traci Hong: Social Media Should Include Warnings About Nicotine, Vaping – and Social Media Itself, Say Large Majorities. And in October, our poll examined gendered media effects with Dr. Nivea Canalli Bona: Social Media Negatively Impacts Women More than Men, Americans Say in Survey. Faculty fellows interested in participating in a future poll can propose topics of interest by completing this form.

Finally, to make communication research more accessible to the public, the CRC has launched The COMversation, a podcast that connects academic insights with current events. Hosted by Dr. Charlotte Howell, the debut episode dives into the evolving norms of communication and the role of misinformation in politics, providing listeners with an engaging, in-depth discussion on these timely issues. And, as of today, the second episode Wicked Success has been released; it explores the rise in on-screen adaptations, big-budget marketing tours, and what led to the wicked success of Wicked Part 1.

None of these efforts would have been possible without the commitment and hard work of our staff this fall. I am tremendously grateful to our Lab and Research Manager, Amanda King, who received their certification from iMotions in human behavior research and has been offering an unbelievable number of workshops to our students throughout the semester. I would also like to thank our wonderful graduate and undergraduate assistants who helped to keep the Center running. Yelena Rodolitz (EMS) is our SONA administrator doing the behind-the-scenes work on our research participant management system. Yifang “Violet” Li (MCR) is our Communications Assistant writing about and promoting our activities. And Abby Bonner (FTV) and Eliza Lakritz (MS/AH) are our Podcast Assistants putting all the procedures and protocols in place for getting our podcast launched. Thanks to all, and I’m delighted our assistants will be continuing with us in the spring semester.

To our CRC community of fellows, I wish you all a joyous and restful holiday season and look forward to the many new and exciting activities we are planning for 2025!

Letter from the Director: November 2024

By ajk90November 18th, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

Election 2024 Debrief: Insights from Communication Research

By: Michelle Amazeen

Since November 5th, there has been ongoing reflection on why the election ultimately favored Trump, particularly given his frequent use of misleading or false claims. For those who study media and communication, the link between misinformation and voting behavior is concerning. A Reuters/Ipsos poll found that Americans misinformed about crime rates, the economy, and immigration were more likely to vote for Trump.

One critical factor not fully captured by polling data is the persistence of high prices on essentials like groceries and housing, despite a decrease in inflation over the past year. If people struggle to put food on the table or keep up with rent, that tangible economic hardship outweighs broader statistical trends.

At the same time, the constant barrage of misinformation – spread through ads, news programming, and social media – can create an illusory truth effect where repetition makes false claims seem credible. This repetition led many to believe that issues like border crossings and inflation remained out-of-control, despite evidence suggesting otherwise.

In understanding the election outcome, it’s also important to consider the quickly evolving media environment and changes in how people are getting their news and information. These are topics I have explored in-depth with my students throughout the year. Podcasts, for example, are an increasingly popular medium for news, with nearly half of US adults having listened to at least one in the past month, according to Statista. Both presidential candidates tapped into this trend, appearing on influential podcasts such as Joe Rogan’s (Trump) and Howard Stern’s (Harris). Simultaneously, many Americans are turning away from traditional news outlets and are seeking information online from alternative sources and influencers. Even some prominent journalists have left legacy media to strike out on their own (see Kara Swisher, Taylor Lorenz, and Chris Wallace).

Social media has also become a dominant news source. More than half (54%) of US adults, and over three-quarters (78%) of young adults aged 18-24, get their news from social media at least occasionally. My students, drawing from their own experiences and research, tell me that young people prefer social media for news because it’s accessible, caters to shorter attention spans, and—importantly—is free. With paid news subscriptions largely unappealing to young audiences, free access on platforms like Instagram and TikTok is more attractive.

However, these alternative news sources often lack the commitment to journalistic principles like verification and accuracy. Since Twitter’s rebranding to X, the platform has become a significant vector for misinformation. Facebook has also deemphasized its role as a news source, removing its news tab and ending licensing deals with publishers. While some news influencers strive to engage and inform audiences, foreign adversaries have also leveraged the influence of certain content creators to spread conspiratorial narratives that deepen existing societal divisions.

The election outcome highlights how emotional narratives held more sway than facts and logic. Interestingly, my research with Dr. Arunima Krishna has shown that narrative-based counter-messaging can help combat misinformation. This offers a hopeful silver lining for our communication students, who are learning to become the emotionally resonant storytellers of tomorrow.

To make communication research more accessible to the public, the CRC recently launched The COMversation, a podcast that connects academic insights with current events. Hosted by Dr. Charlotte Howell, the debut episode dives into the evolving norms of communication and the role of misinformation in politics, providing listeners with an engaging, in-depth discussion on these timely issues.

If you're interested in exploring how communication research informs our understanding of current events, join us on The COMversation. Listen to the latest episode, share it with your network, and be part of a conversation that strives for a more informed and engaged public.

Letter from the Director: October 2024

By Michelle AmazeenOctober 17th, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

Resisting the Era of Darkening: The Researcher Support Consortium

By: Michelle Amazeen

Last week, I moderated a panel of experts on the growing intimidation and harassment faced by researchers studying misinformation. As I’ve noted in previous writings, scholars investigating the origins, spread, and impacts of misinformation are increasingly becoming targets of congressional hearings, subpoenas, doxxing, and other forms of abuse. According to reports in the New York Times and the Washington Post, these attacks are often framed as reactions to alleged political bias and the suppression of conservative speech. Rather than debating the merits of this argument – which lacks empirical support –my focus is on highlighting the assaults on misinformation researchers. My goal is to raise awareness of this issue, help researchers access the support they need to continue their vital work, and to urge institutions to implement protections for these researchers.

Efforts to silence those presenting scientific evidence that challenges prevailing beliefs are far from new. In the 1500s, Copernicus, whose heliocentric theory contradicted the Catholic Church’s geocentric view that the Earth was the center of the universe, was denounced for proposing that the Earth orbits the sun. Galileo, who defended this theory, spent the final years of his life under house arrest as a result. During Nazi Germany’s Third Reich (1933-1945), scholars who produced evidence contradicting Nazi ideology, particularly the belief in a “Master race,” faced imprisonment, exile, or worse. And for years, the US tobacco industry attempted to raise doubt, discredit, and derail the work of scientists providing evidence of the connection between smoking and cancer. This strategic suppression has been repeated against those raising alarms about climate change, those studying vaccines, and, more recently, misinformation researchers.

Intimidation and harassment of scientific experts has become an occupational hazard. Nearly half of US researchers report that they or someone they know has been a target. Among climate scientists who have been quoted in the media at least once a month, almost 3 in 4 have experienced abuse. It’s even worse for scientists who are women or from underrepresented groups.

Coordinated campaigns targeting researchers have far-reaching personal, professional, and societal consequences. On a personal level, those attacked often experience heightened anxiety, depression and social withdrawal. Professionally, these researchers are more likely to self-censor, limit the public availability of their work, or even leave the field entirely. As a result, public trust in scientific experts and higher education erodes, stifling informed discourse and debate. Ultimately, we are moving away from the age of enlightenment into an era of darkening where science, empirical evidence, and rationality are obscured.

But it doesn’t have to be this way. The Researcher Support Consortium has compiled resources to assist those under attack and provides guidance to organizations on how to effectively address their needs. Researchers can empower themselves by planning ways to mitigate risks, by developing strategic response strategies, and by connecting with a broader community of supporters.

Institutions have an important role to play in supporting researchers, as well. The Researcher Support Consortium offers a toolkit of practical and actionable steps that institutions can take to prepare for attacks. Steps include setting up researcher support and response teams, understanding how to effectively communicate with impacted researchers, and responding to incidents of abuse while both protecting the needs of the researcher and the reputation of the institution.

To this end, the CRC has issued a statement on researcher intimidation and harassment, which is available in full here. The CRC views these threats as serious occupational hazards and is committed to 1) raising awareness of these challenges, 2) creating robust policies and protocols to safeguard researchers, and 3) fostering an environment that empowers our research fellows to continue their important work in addressing contemporary societal challenges.

Thank you to the researchers who have established the Researcher Support Consortium, a valuable resource that will benefit many.

Letter from the Director: September 2024

By ajk90September 3rd, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

Back-to-School 2024

By: Michelle Amazeen

A group photo at AEJMC 2024
Pictured at the 2024 AEJMC conference in Philadelphia: Dr. Cen April Yue, Dr. Arunima Krishna, Dr. Sung-Un Yang, Dr. Michelle Amazeen, and Dr. Ejae Lee.

The fall semester is upon us, and I hope CRC fellows are re-engaging with renewed energy and enthusiasm. Over the summer, many of us turned to advancing our research efforts and sharing our work on the academic conference circuit. COM was well represented at the International Communication Association in Gold Coast, Australia and also at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

As of July 1st, the CRC welcomed five new scholars: Dr. Sung-Un Yang, Professor and Chair, Department of Mass Communication, Advertising and Public Relations; Dr. Juwon Hwang, Assistant Professor of Media Science; Dr. Ejae Lee, Assistant Professor of Public Relations; Dr. Ayse Lokmanoglu, Assistant Professor of Emerging Media Studies; and Dr. Cen April Yue, Assistant Professor of Public Relations. I am excited to have them as colleagues and look forward to working with and learning from them.

All COM faculty, staff, and students are welcome to attend the CRC’s inaugural Open House scheduled for Thursday, September 26th from 4:00 – 6:00 pm. Co-hosted with CISS, you can start off on the lower level of Alden Hall, 704 Commonwealth Avenue to enjoy refreshments, demonstrations of our biometric technologies, and opportunities to network with your colleagues in the CRC. And you can also visit our friends from the Center for Innovation in Social Science on the 5th floor to learn about their research and affiliation opportunities. Please RSVP here if you plan on attending.

The CRC’s fall programming is set with an outstanding lineup of presentations. Our Colloquium Series includes the following talks from COM researchers:

  • September 24 (Tuesday) @ 3:30 pm: Dr. Denis Wu
  • October 23 (Wednesday) @ 3:30 pm: Dr. Betsi Grabe
  • November 20 (Wednesday) @ 3:30 pm: Dr. Chris Wells

More details on each presentation coming soon!

As part of our Dr. Melvin L. DeFleur Distinguished Lecture Series, on Wednesday, November 13th @ 3:30 pm we will welcome to our campus Dr. Bart Wojdynski, Jim Kennedy New Media Professor and Director of the Digital Media Attention and Cognition (DMAC) Lab at University of Georgia, Athens. More details on Dr. Wojdynski’s lecture coming soon, as well.

In collaboration with COM’s MarComm department, we will be hosting a COMtalk virtual panel titled, The Campaign to Curb Misinformation Research, @ 3 p.m., ET, Wednesday, October 9, 2024. I will moderate a panel of esteemed misinformation researchers including Dr. Joan Donovan, Assistant Professor of Journalism, Boston University; Dr. Claire Wardle, Associate Professor, Cornell University, and Co-founder, Information Future Lab; and Dr. Rebekah Tromble, Director of the Institute for Data, Democracy, and Politics and Associate Professor, George Washington University.

Panel Description: The alarming rise of mis- and disinformation influencing recent elections spurred a flurry of new research to understand the trend. But work among academics, nonprofits and the technology sector made some activists suspicious that a conspiracy was developing to muzzle conservative and right-wing ideas – leading to a campaign to curb research. In these polarized times, is the future of the field threatened?

Our monthly Work-in-Progress (WIP) meetings resumes on September 26th at 12:30 pm in the CRC room B04E. WIP is your opportunity to forge connections within our research community and talk research with other COM faculty members. Attendees are encouraged to bring a brown bag lunch.

A green sign saying 'Works in Progress'

The CRC will also continue to offer research training opportunities for faculty and students on our technologies including Meltwater and iMotions software. Over the summer, our Lab and Research Manager, Amanda King, received their certification in Human Behavior Research with a focus on biosensor modules from iMotions. Amanda is available for offering workshops for your students this fall to expose them to biometric research. If interested in learning more, you can email Amanda at ajk90@bu.edu.

To further promote the thought leadership of our faculty fellows, the CRC is continuing its Media & Technology Public Opinion Poll with national polling firm, Ipsos. Since its inception in January 2022, CRC fellows have polled the public on information integrity topics ranging from media trust, artificial intelligence, climate change, social media censorship, dating apps, media literacy, and more. Check out the press releases here. Fellows can also access the raw data to past polls here (password protected). Curious about fielding a poll related to your own research? Find more details and submit your interest here.

Finally, stay tuned for a fun initiative the CRC is embarking on to rename the rooms in our center. No more B04E, B02A, or the ill-advised NRA. We’ll be soliciting your input for communication research related suggestions for our rooms (think the Herta Herzog Naturalistic Viewing Room). Share your suggestions here.

I wish you all a wonderful fall semester and hope to see you around campus (if not in the CRC) soon!

Letter from the Director: August 2024

By ajk90August 8th, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

The Next Frontier: A Deep Dive into Biometrics with Lab Manager, Amanda King

By: Michelle Amazeen

As part of our mission, the Communication Research Center offers state-of-the art technology to facilitate our fellows’ ability to advance theory and methods in addressing society’s communication-related challenges. One of our unique resources is a suite of biometric technologies that allow for the measurement of psychophysiological responses – be it eye movements, facial expressions, galvanic skin response, heart rates, or brain waves. All of this data is conveniently captured within our iMotions software, which runs all the applicable R formulas behind the scenes, allowing you to instantly visualize your biometric data.

This summer, CRC Lab and Research Manager, Amanda King, attended a seminar provided by iMotions to earn their certification in Human Behavior Research with a focus on biosensor modules.

I’ve asked Amanda to share their thoughts on biometric research and some of what they learned during their certification process.


Michelle: How would you explain biometric research to someone who has never heard of it?”

Amanda: I love this question because whenever I sit down to teach a workshop and ask the students if they have any idea what it is, all I get are blank stares and uncomfortable smiles. I’ve found the easiest way to explain it is “measuring the emotional experience of consuming media content.” It’s a bit reductive, but helps folks understand. I try not to inundate students with overly technical terminology, because, at the end of the day, I’m trying to pique their interest and give them the opportunity to dip their toes into the world of biometric research.


Michelle: What type of training did you receive this summer?

Amanda: I was fortunate enough to be able to attend a weeklong certification program, at the iMotions lab in Boston. This specific course, there are more advanced courses I hope to attend some day, was designed to build upon the attendee's basic understanding of human behavior research and how biometric sensors can be integrated into this kind of research. Practitioners from all research areas attended, from marketing and medical to communication and psychology. The first half of the week was to give a high-level overview of the sensors available to us and the latter half was to incorporate these into a study of our design.


Michelle: What were the highlights of your training?

Amanda: As a bit of a tech nerd, I loved being able to spend time with the multitude of biometric sensors that were at our disposal during the academy. Getting to see the EEG headset – NeuroElectrics Enobio 8 – measure brain waves in real time was inspiring.
Honestly, being able to mingle and get to know incredible folks with equally incredible minds was an honor. I was the only local attendee, so getting to hear everyone’s story and what brought them to the academy was a true highlight.
Being able to run a full study, with such a wide-breadth of tools available, was very satisfying. When you’re using top of the line modules, the quality of data you collect makes every peak and dip in the recording meaningful; there’s very little ‘noise’.


Michelle: What are some of the ways communication researchers could incorporate biometrics into their research?

Amanda: I’m going to get the cliché out of the way and say that the only limits are the depths of your imagination and IRB approval, of course. On a more serious note, biometrics can be applied to nearly every aspect of communication research.


EEG headsets can allow researchers to measure the brain waves associated with approach and avoidance behaviors to better understand consumers’ attitudes towards certain brands, and what response their brand elicits. Without getting into the weeds, this is measured by the difference in alpha power (a specific range of brain wave frequency) between the frontal left and right hemispheres of the brain.

An eye-tracker could be used in emerging media research to measure specific design choices within video game development by measuring the length of time between object appearance and user fixation. For instance, if a ledge is painted yellow, what’s the length of time between when the ledge appears on the screen and when the user's gaze lands on the ledge. This kind of research allows game-developers to make games more accessible for a wider audience, especially those with visual impairments.

A GSR sensor, which measures the changes in sweat gland activity on the skin, can give insight into the state of a subject’s arousal – whether they’re relaxed or alert. GSR sensors can be used in UX & UI design, user experience and user interface respectively, to give clients an idea of what aspects of their site design needs improvement or alteration.

These are just a few examples! However, I’d like to note that biometric devices are best used in conjunction with one another. They are complementary and a single device may not be able to give you a comprehensive picture.


Michelle: Are there any articles you’ve discovered that provide a good example of how biometrics have been used for communication research [or more broadly]?

Amanda: Yes! I have a couple I would love to share with you.
As a self-proclaimed ‘scream queen’, I love all things horror and this study has nested inside my brain for well over a decade. Using a heart-rate monitor, researchers were able to determine the scariest movie of all time. With pulses jumping by 28.21% beats per minute, the ‘Here’s Johnny’ scene of Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining was determined to be the most horrifying scene of all. Science can be fun!

While this is a short read, it makes a very concise and compelling case for good advertising design, which is something I have been unable to stop considering since I finished my bachelor’s in Advertising, all those years ago (thanks, Colby). In a study of 106 people, they were shown two advertisements: one with a baby looking at the participant and one with a baby looking at the text within the ad. Using eye-tracking heat maps, they determined that participants looked at the text more rapidly when the baby was gazing at it. Humans are designed to seek out faces and look to where their gaze is. Quantifying our most basic instincts is something that drew me to research in the first place.

Lastly, a study I learned about during my time at the iMotions Academy, was the use of a specific EEG measurement –neural synchrony – to predict the popularity of a given song. Neural synchrony is, essentially, how well the brain activity of different people aligns when they experience something together. The more synchronized the brain waves are between a group of people, the more likely they are to act similarly; it’s one of the underlying mechanisms for group cooperation and the spread of social phenomena.

30 participants were asked to rate their musical preferences and were then given two samples from a R&B album and a pop album. Even though most of the participants were self-proclaimed pop fans, the R&B album performed better among participants and, coincidentally, performed better in sales, when released on the market. They found that the greater the neural synchrony between subjects, while listening to an audio clip in a “neural focus group” predicted the amount of ‘streams’ on Spotify, and did so better than subjects’ self-reports of music-genre proclivity. Their engagement was also measured using EEG, which closely corresponds with recall, which can lead to an increased frequency of streams.
A lengthy, but worthwhile read.


Michelle: Have any CRC fellows published any research studies that incorporated biometric technologies?

Amanda: As a matter of fact, Dr. Denis Wu recently published a study incorporating several of the CRC’s technological offerings: (FEA) facial expression analysis and eye-tracking. The study is “Enjoyment and Appreciation of Political Advertisements: How voters’ Issue Involvement and Congruence with the Sponsor Influence Their Responses and Decisions”. Using FEA to capture facial expressions and eye-tracking to measure how long each participant spent looking at stimuli, Dr. Wu was able to positively associate voting decisions with elicited reactions.


Michelle: How can you help fellows and COM faculty practitioners who might be interested in learning more about biometrics?

Amanda: I’m glad you asked! I am happy to provide both demonstrations of our devices and more in-depth workshops for each individual device, for both individuals and in classroom settings. I will, with our new updated technology arriving for the Fall ‘24 semester (don’t get me started, I could wax-poetic for hours), be reworking my current workshop structure. Please feel free to reach out to me if you’re interested; I’m always at the front desk in the basement of 704 or can be contacted at ajk90@bu.edu.

We’ll be offering more opportunities to learn about biometrics this fall with a colloquium presentation from CRC fellow Dr. Denis Wu in September. Moreover, our fall 2024 Dr. Melvin L. DeFleur Lecturer will be Dr. Bart Wojdynski from the University of Georgia, Athens whose expertise includes psychophysiological effects of communication technologies.

Letter from the Director: July 2024

By ajk90July 2nd, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

The Role of Information Integrity in BU’s Next Chapter

By: Michelle Amazeen

As part of COM’s strategic plan to focus on communication that helps society engage with modern challenges, many fellows of the Communication Research Center have been sharpening their attention on issues of information integrity. As such, it was unsurprising to see so many of our researchers in the Gold Coast of Australia at the 74th Annual International Communication Association conference that was themed, “Communication and Global Human Rights.” Indeed, the United Nations has long held that freedom of information is a fundamental human right and “is the touchstone of all the freedoms to which the United Nations is consecrated.”

To demonstrate its commitment to the integrity of information, Secretary-General António Guterres recently announced the UN’s Global Principles for Information Integrity. Coming just months after the World Economic Forum’s 2024 Global Risks report warned the threat of mis- and disinformation will intensify societal divides around the world over the next two years, the UN report provides a much needed official framework to protect and promote the integrity of information in our media ecosystems at a time when accurate information is under siege. Given that democratic societies depend upon fact-based, shared perceptions of reality, these assaults on information are an attack on democracy.

As the Secretary General called out stakeholders for their role in this crisis, I was struck by how many of our CRC fellows are already engaged in researching aspects of these very issues. Whether its studying the damage the products of big tech companies are having on individuals and society or the evolution of their platform guidelines, to how advertisers and the public relations industry are creating coordinated disinformation campaigns to undermine climate action, our fellows are on it. We also have teams of our researchers studying the implications of generative artificial intelligence, another factor mentioned by Guterres as supercharging the threats to information integrity.

With BU’s transition to the leadership of President Melissa Gilliam and Provost Gloria Waters, a refreshening of the thematic areas of the university’s strategic plans is likely in store, in part to better reflect the research excellence of the university. Given how information integrity is affecting so many aspects of society, this is one area where researchers from COM can and should be leading. I look forward to this next chapter in BU’s journey.

Letter from the Director: May 2024

By ajk90June 14th, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

The Spring 2024 Semester in Review

By: Michelle Amazeen

An image of Boston University in the background, with the Green Line in the foreground. The street lined with trees.

With the end of another semester, I have been reflecting upon the many activities in the CRC and among our fellows in 2024, thus far. This spring, we launched the inaugural call for Faculty Research Seed Grant proposals with the aim of fostering inter-departmental, cross-disciplinary collaborations on communication-related issues to help society engage with modern challenges. The CRC is pleased to announce three teams of awardees:

  • Dr. Katy Coduto, Assistant Professor, Media Science, and Prof. Margaret Wallace, Associate Professor of the Practice, Media Innovation for their project, “Mapping Relational Trajectories with Generative Artificial Intelligence: Insights for Theory and Practice.”
  • Dr. Yi Grace Ji, Assistant Professor, Mass Communication, Advertising, and Public Relations; Dr. James J. Cummings, Associate Professor, Emerging Media Studies; Dr. Chris Chao Su, Assistant Professor, Emerging Media Studies, and Prof. Anne Danehy, Associate Professor of the Practice, Mass Communication, Advertising, and Public Relations for their project, “Learning Information with Generative AI: Implications for Elaborative Processing.”
  • Dr. AnneMarie McClain, Assistant Professor, Media Science and Elly Kramer, former Senior Vice President of Animation at Imagine Entertainment & Television for their project, “Representing Gender Expansively: Media Uses and Hopes Among Gender Expansive Youth and Their Families.”

Look for more details about these projects in the future on our website and as part of the CRC’s Colloquium Lecture Series.

Now in its 15th year of programming, our Colloquium Series consists of monthly research presentations that highlight the original research of our CRC fellows. I would like to thank our 2024 spring Colloquium speakers which included Dr. James E. Katz, Feld Professor of Emerging Media Studies (February), Dr. AnneMarie McClain, Assistant Professor of Media Science (March), and Prof. Anne Danehy, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs (April). You can read about and see recordings of each of these presentations as well as those from all of our past Colloquium speakers on our website.

In addition to our Colloquium Series, every semester our fellows nominate a distinguished scholar from outside the university to share their outstanding scholarship, expertise, and experience with the BU community. Our distinguished lecture series is a tribute to Dr. Melvin L. DeFleur, a past colleague, to honor his contributions to the fields of communication and media research. This spring, we were honored to host Dr. Lee H. Humphreys (Cornell University) as our DeFleur Distinguished Lecturer who spoke about “Sensor Mediated Communication and the Internet of Things.” A recording of her talk is accessible on our website, as well.

In promoting a culture of research and collaboration, our fellows had opportunities throughout the semester to gather together in person. Our Work-In-Progress meetings enabled fellows to discuss their ongoing research, conference submission plans as well as Institutional Review Board and grant-seeking questions. Moreover, our PhD fellow Briana Trifiro continued the Lunch & Learn series enabling doctoral students the opportunity to talk with faculty and Emerging Media Studies PhD alumni about their academic research and careers. While we will continue these activities in the future, please let me know if you have ideas for other ways to foster opportunities for intellectual inquiry.

Since its inception in January 2022, the COM/CRC Media & Technology Public Opinion Poll has enabled faculty fellows to advance their thought leadership on a variety of information integrity topics. This past semester, our polls involved media literacy (January), dating apps (February), and text generated by artificial intelligence (March) leading to media coverage from The Boston Globe and NPR. Faculty members with ideas for a future poll can get involved by completing this Google Form.

Given the University’s commitment to engaging students in research, the CRC continued to facilitate fellows’ efforts to recruit students as research participants via our SONA research participant management system. The SONA system gives both graduate and undergraduate students an opportunity to become involved with various research activities across COM while earning course credit for doing so. This semester, 25 research studies were available to over 600 students from 22 different COM courses. I hope you will consider registering your courses for the fall semester. For more information about how our SONA program works, please visit our website or email comsona@bu.edu.

Last but not least, I am incredibly grateful for the commitment and hard work of our staff this spring. Many thanks to our Lab and Research Manager, Amanda King, who has made our facilities a welcoming place for scholarly activities and has skillfully trained both experienced and emerging researchers on the technologies offered by the CRC. I would also like to thank our wonderful graduate assistants who helped to keep the Center running. Alyssa Hance (EMS) was our SONA administrator assisting with the behind-the-scenes work on our research participant management system and also assisted with research projects in the Center. YiFang “Violet” Li (MCR) was our Communications Assistant writing about and promoting our activities and our fellows. And Abby Bonner (FTV) was our Podcast Assistant developing the protocols and processes for our planned podcasting efforts. Thanks to you all!

To our CRC community of fellows, I wish you a wonderful summer with time to relax and recharge. I look forward to seeing you in the fall.

Letter from the Director: January 2024

By ajk90January 25th, 2024in Homepage, Letters From the Director

Growing Risk of Disinformation

By: Michelle Amazeen

An image of a newspaper with the headline 'Fact or Fake' and a subheading 'Truth or disinformation'.

The new year began with the World Economic Forum releasing its 2024 Global Risks Report which describes hazards occurring in the global landscape from year to year. Topping the 2024 report is the threat of mis- and disinformation intensifying societal divides around the world over the next two years.

Indeed, in the year ahead, the American public is facing numerous issues that require informed decisions. We are navigating a presidential election, military action in Ukraine and Gaza, continued resistance against taking meaningful action on climate change, and lingering waves of Covid-19, just to name a few. Each of these on its own is challenging enough. However, dealing with all of them simultaneously and combined with the increased use of generative artificial intelligence, the media ecosystem is poised for a tsunami of disinformation: deliberately false content intended to mislead.

Do we trust US media to get us this information accurately? According to a nationally representative poll COM conducted in 2022, roughly 60% of Americans said they trusted media to provide accurate information on the issues of climate change, elections, and vaccines. Even fewer (55%) trusted media to make a clear distinction between news and advertising. But there were stark differences in responses based upon political identity: Democrats were much more trusting of media on these topics (80%) than were Republicans (just over a third). Other national polls, such as from Gallup, indicate that Americans’ trust in media more generally is at a record low point with similar partisan divides.

The concern with misinformation is not just among elites, but is also held by everyday Americans. A recent national survey by MediaWise revealed that 4 out of 5 participants (81%) believed false or misleading online images were a problem for society. At the same time, roughly 3 in 4 respondents were not confident in their ability to identify misinformation. According to CRC fellow Dr. Joan Donovan, Assistant Professor of Emerging Media Studies and Journalism and author of Meme Wars, “The entire purpose of media manipulation campaigns is to trick you, so it’s not easy to quickly discern fakes from facts in today’s media. Viral memes are often missing the context needed to understand the motives of the author and really viral memes will shed any reference to the original source as it is distributed. This is why we need to be able to access more reputable news sources on social media.”

Thus, now, more than ever, is when media literacy is essential. Media literacy is the ability to critically analyze stories presented in the media and to determine their accuracy or credibility. My research has shown that the more people know about the media, the better able they are to resist online disinformation efforts. According to our latest Media & Technology poll among a nationally representative sample of US adults fielded this month, 72% of respondents agree that media literacy skills are important in helping people identify misinformation, yet only 42% report knowing how to access quality media literacy training online. Yet, there is demand for these skills as nearly 7 in 10 reported interest in learning how to better distinguish between true and false information online, especially when it comes to identifying misinformation generated with AI.

Given the challenging times before us, I am pleased to welcome a new voice among our CRC fellows who study mediated communication dysfunction. Dr. Betsi Grabe joins COM this month as the Dalton Family Professor and will be directing the Emerging Media Studies PhD program. While the first part of Dr. Grabe’s career was spent conducting research to understand the media’s role in facilitating informed citizenship, more recently her focus has shifted to researching disinformed citizenship. “My sense is that the integrity of the global information ecosystem is critical to the longevity of the democratic way of life,” Grabe tells me. “Actionable research that shapes public debate, informs policy, and empowers citizens is urgently necessary and arguably, part of our social responsibility as academics.”

We are fortunate to have so many esteemed researchers who are committed to understanding why and how media affect us and society at this time of extreme information disorder. I look forward to working with Dr. Grabe and the continued efforts among all CRC fellows in conducting research that matters.