Monday, July 27, 2026

 


New project to safeguard AI systems used in scientific research






University of Illinois School of Information Sciences




As artificial intelligence becomes central to scientific discovery, researchers face a growing but often overlooked risk: the AI models, datasets, and automated systems they depend on can be compromised in ways that conventional cybersecurity tools are not designed to detect.

A new project called VERITAS (VERified Infrastructure for Trustworthy AI in Science), led by principal investigator Anita Nikolich, research scientist and director of research and technology innovation at the University of Illinois School of Information Sciences, will address this gap by establishing AI Assurance as a core function of scientific research infrastructure. Funded through a three-year, $896,000 grant from the National Science Foundation's Cybersecurity Innovation for Cyberinfrastructure program, VERITAS brings together experts in adversarial AI, research cyberinfrastructure, data science, and workforce development. The project aims to develop practical methods for documenting, reviewing, and stress-testing AI systems before they are used in high-impact scientific workflows.

A blind spot in how science secures AI

Traditional cybersecurity focuses on preventing unauthorized access, catching malware, and stopping data theft. AI-enabled research introduces additional risks that may not trigger conventional security alerts.

A poisoned dataset, for example, may appear statistically normal while causing a model to produce unreliable results. A backdoored model downloaded from a public repository may contain no recognizable malware and may operate normally until a particular input activates its hidden behavior. An autonomous AI agent may have excessive permissions that allow it to alter data, invoke laboratory tools, or manipulate a research workflow.

In each case, the infrastructure may appear secure while the scientific result is compromised.

"We cannot simply bolt traditional cybersecurity onto AI-driven science," said Nikolich. "When a poisoned dataset or backdoored model produces an answer that looks plausible but is subtly wrong, no firewall or virus scanner is likely to catch it. The researchers doing our most important scientific work deserve assurance that the AI systems they rely on are documented, tested, and behaving as intended."

According to Nikolich, rather than requiring scientists to become cybersecurity experts or expecting cybersecurity teams to become machine-learning specialists, VERITAS will integrate AI Assurance into the research infrastructure scientists already use. The project has three connected components:

Model and data documentation. VERITAS will pilot standardized model cards and dataset datasheets for large scientific computing allocations. Similar to nutrition labels on packaged food, these documents describe where a model or dataset came from, how it was created or modified, its intended use, its known limitations, and the assumptions researchers should understand before reusing it. The goal is to improve transparency, reproducibility, and the ability to trace problems through complex AI workflows.

Operational AI security services. VERITAS will pilot a new AI Assurance Engineer role at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA). The engineer will review selected technically novel AI projects before deployment, scan model files for unsafe or malicious behavior, examine software for vulnerabilities, and assess the risks around uses of autonomous agents. 

Model and data integrity challenges. Through the National Data Platform (NDP) Education Hub, VERITAS will create hands-on challenges that train students to detect poisoned data, inspect potentially compromised models, evaluate agent permissions, and identify weaknesses in scientific AI workflows. 

Finding vulnerabilities before they become scientific failures

AI red-teaming—deliberately attacking an AI system to find its weaknesses before an adversary does—is now a well-established field. It has rarely been brought into scientific research, where a manipulated model produces a false result that can pass for legitimate science. VERITAS is among the first efforts to adapt the practice to scientific cyberinfrastructure. 

"AI systems can fail in ways that are difficult to distinguish from legitimate scientific results," said Nikolich. "Proactive red teaming allows us to identify those weaknesses before a vulnerable model or agent becomes embedded in a research pipeline. The objective is to help research teams make their systems more trustworthy and resilient."

Building the AI Assurance workforce

VERITAS will also help prepare students for careers at the intersection of machine learning, cybersecurity, and scientific computing. Participants in the project's challenges will work with realistic scientific models, datasets, and infrastructure using NDP while learning about responsible disclosure practices.

By embedding documentation, security review, adversarial assessment, and workforce development into existing scientific cyberinfrastructure, VERITAS seeks to create a model for AI Assurance that can be adopted by supercomputing centers, research institutions, and national-scale AI infrastructure providers.

"AI is now part of the scientific workflow," Nikolich said. "We need to protect its integrity just as seriously as we protect the networks and computing systems around it."


AI model advances scientific discovery with soil carbon research




Cornell University




ITHACA, N.Y. – A new computer model from Cornell University researchers is one of the first artificial intelligence tools to advance scientific discovery in agriculture and biogeochemistry and is 50 times more efficient than its predecessors.

In a paper published in the journal Geoscientific Model Development, the researchers demonstrated the AI on processes behind the important issue of soil organic carbon, as the Earth’s soils hold roughly three-quarters of the world’s terrestrial carbon and more carbon than the atmosphere and all the world’s plants combined.

Scientists have been exploring ways to use AI for research purposes, but most common AI tools, such as ChatGPT, mainly repurpose existing information. Researchers have also used AI to extract patterns from data. But the new model, called the Biogeochemistry-Informed Neural Network (BINN) goes a step further by predicting biological processes that are not yet well understood and suggesting factors that control them.

“BINN is very easy to use and can be democratized among the scientific community in various disciplines,” said Yiqi Luo, the senior author of the study. “This is one of the first tools of this type that can promote scientific research with AI.”

Soil scientists know the mechanisms by which soils acquire organic carbon – plants extract and sequester carbon from carbon dioxide to grow, and when those plants die, organic matter from stems, leaves and roots decompose into smaller and smaller bits to become part of the earth. But what is not well known are the speed of these processes and how many such processes are required to break down the litter.

“We use AI and data to tell us quantitatively how fast and how many of these kinds of processes are required,” said Haodi Xu, a doctoral student in Luo’s lab, and co-first author of the study.

When compared to previous models, BINN computed 50 times faster. The accuracy of predictions of quantities of soil organic carbon was found to be very similar to the previous models. But previous models contained spatial biases, meaning that when making predictions across the contiguous U.S., it might favor the data from one area versus another. The researchers found less spatial bias with BINN.

For additional information, read this Cornell Chronicle story.

Cornell University has dedicated television and audio studios available for media interviews.

-30-

 

 

Burning soil and peat drove most emissions in Canada’s record 2023 wildfire season





McMaster University





Hamilton, ON, July 27, 2026 –Most of the carbon released during Canada’s record-breaking 2023 wildfire season came from burning soil and peat, rather than trees, according to new research from McMaster University.

The study, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters, found that underground carbon stores accounted for 76 per cent of wildfire emissions, helping drive a fire season that released nearly a quarter of the world's wildfire emissions that year.

Researchers estimate the 2023 wildfires burned 15.1 million hectares - seven times Canada’s 20-year average – and released 554 million tonnes of carbon.

“Canada stewards 20 per cent of the world’s soil organic carbon in its peatlands and soils. Future wildfire risk is not just about losing forests, it’s about releasing these vast stores of carbon that have accumulated underground over millennia into the atmosphere,” explains Alemu Gonsamo, associate professor in the School of Earth, Environment & Society, who has long studied Canada’s land ecosystems.  

Peatlands are waterlogged ecosystems that have traditionally helped stop fires from spreading. But hotter and drier conditions in recent years have lowered water levels, turning normally fire-resistant peatlands into massive smouldering fuel sources.

“When fires start under these conditions, they can burn deep into peat and soil, releasing carbon that took thousands of years to accumulate in a single fire season,” says Gonsamo.

Canada is home to about 1.1 million square kilometres of peatlands. The Hudson Bay Lowlands alone, which are the second largest peatland complex in the world, store an estimated 30 billion tonnes of carbon.

The findings highlight the vulnerability of Canada’s soil carbon stores to intensifying wildfires.

“For years we've focused mostly on the trees that burn. This study shows we must also pay attention to what's happening beneath the surface,” says Gonsamo. “While forest management remains important, its impact is limited because many of these fires occur in remote, unmanaged areas. Prolonged hot and dry conditions are allowing smoldering ground fires to persist and releasing significant amounts of stored carbon.

One-third of all wildfire carbon emissions in 2023 were linked to peatlands alone.

“What we’re seeing is a shift from these landscapes storing carbon to releasing large amounts of it during extreme wildfire seasons,” says Gonsamo. Once that carbon is released, it contributes to further warming and increases the risk of future fires.

The climate impact of the 2023 Canadian wildfires was enormous. In carbon dioxide terms, the emissions were roughly three times greater than Canada's annual human-caused greenhouse-gas emissions reported for 2022.

“There is no alternative to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change and curb the growing intensity of wildfire emissions in Canada and elsewhere,” says Gonsamo.

“Addressing the root cause of increasingly severe fire seasons requires coordinated global action on climate change. This cannot be done by Canada alone.”

-30-

UC Irvine researchers create California wildfire damage risk map



Predictive model uses factors most closely linked to severe property losses




University of California - Irvine






Irvine, Calif., July 27, 2026 By analyzing 100,000 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection inspection records from 2013 to 2024, researchers at the University of California, Irvine have identified the key environmental and human factors responsible for the most destructive wildfires, and they have synthesized the knowledge into a high-resolution, actionable fire risk map for the Golden State.

The team, from UC Irvine’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, learned that during the 12-year study period, nearly 55,000 buildings were completely destroyed or partially damaged by fire and that 86 percent of those structures were in wildland-urban interface zones where nature meets development. The findings are outlined in a paper published in Science Advances.

“We uncovered predictable features in how buildings are destroyed in California’s wildfires, which shows that the damage pattern is not random,” said lead author Somnath Bar, a UC Irvine postdoctoral scholar in civil and environmental engineering. “We have found that by identifying the precise combination of structural, environmental and weather factors involved, we can establish a comprehensive, physically interpretable framework to explain, model and project which buildings are most likely to be damaged or destroyed by fire.”

“As fire season stretches longer into the year and blazes devastate communities across California, the need for precise, actionable fire risk data has never been greater,” said Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie-Norris (D-Irvine). “Good policy starts with good data. UC Irvine’s new fire risk map gives California exactly that – a clear picture of where the danger is greatest, so we can invest in smarter building practices, targeted fuel reduction, and data-driven planning before disaster strikes rather than after.”

Connecting landscape fires to buildings

In the paper, the researchers point to environmental elements such as low dew-point temperatures, trackable by instruments, that indicate elevated atmospheric dryness. Coupled with high wind speeds, this aridity can greatly amplify the probability of property destruction in a fire. California’s natural environment, including its grasslands, mesic chaparral and mixed oak woodland areas, serves as a pathway connecting landscape fires to buildings.

The growing tendency of people to build homes in the wildland-urban interface, near the source of forest fires, has resulted in significant property damage, the researchers said. Construction in the WUI increased in the U.S. by roughly 33 percent between 1990 and 2010, adding over 12 million new structures. Between 2020 and 2022, more than 80 percent of new homes built in California were in high fire-risk areas. Many of these WUI zones exist in middle elevations, about 500 meters (1,640 feet) above sea level, where moderate slopes channel wind that can accelerate fire spread and intensity.

According to the researchers, the way buildings are designed and the materials used in their construction can also lead to heightened risk of fire damage. These elements include wooden fences, flammable siding, protruding eaves and vents that can catch burning embers as they drift through the air, resulting in ignitions.

“Fire risk is compounded when these building practices come face to face with environmental factors like atmospheric aridity, high heat, wind, and dry fuels such as trees, shrubs and grasses,” said co-author Tirtha Banerjee, UC Irvine associate professor of civil and environmental engineering.

The Palisades and Eaton fires in Southern California, which destroyed more than 16,000 structures in January 2025, demonstrated the catastrophic potential of Santa Ana wind-driven firestorms combined with topographical attributes such as proximity to forests, sloped terrain, and canyons that channel and accelerate airflow.

The UC Irvine team took these variables and more into account to develop its Wildfire Building Damage Risk Index, a first-of-its-kind, 100-meter-resolution, continuous damage probability map covering all of California. The WBDRI integrates satellite-derived environmental data, gridded fire-weather analyses and building-level structural attributes into a machine learning framework.

The researchers tested three successive model configurations, adding building flammability ratings, weather variables and environmental exposure factors, achieving as high as 88 percent prediction accuracy. Bar said the result is a spatially explicit, actionable tool for risk forecasting, defensible space planning and the development of climate-resilient infrastructure.

“Local jurisdictions and homeowners can use the WBDRI map to prioritize defensible space inspections and fuel reduction investments in zones where the probability of damage exceeds 0.55, the threshold where the return on investment for structural hardening and vegetation management is highest,” he said.

“The strong influence of building flammability on damage tells us something encouraging: Homeowners and communities are not powerless,” Bar continued. “Replacing wood fencing, upgrading siding to noncombustible materials, retrofitting eaves and installing ember-resistant vents can substantially reduce the probability that a structure is lost in a wildfire.”

He noted that the study’s findings carry actionable implications at multiple scales. At the state and regional levels, the WBDRI provides a map of damage risk that can be integrated into land-use planning, insurance risk pricing and emergency management frameworks. At the community level, fire agencies can use it to determine where pre-fire mitigation investments will have the greatest impact. At the household level, the research provides a clear, evidence-based checklist for structural hardening, starting with fences, siding, eaves and roofing.

The researchers say they would like to see agencies adopt strategies combining stricter building codes, forward-looking land-use planning and active vegetation management, particularly in WUI zones. As fire weather conditions intensify, the team argues, such integrated, data-driven approaches are essential for protecting California’s communities and built environment.

Joining Banerjee and Bar on this project was Shu Li, a UC Irvine Ph.D. candidate in civil and environmental engineering. Funding was provided by the National Science Foundation, the University of California Office of the President and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

About the University of California, Irvine: Founded in 1965, UC Irvine is a member of the prestigious Association of American Universities and is ranked among the nation’s top 10 public universities by U.S. News & World Report. The campus has produced five Nobel laureates and is known for its academic achievement, premier research, innovation and anteater mascot. Led by Chancellor Howard Gillman, UC Irvine has more than 36,000 students and offers 224 degree programs. It’s located in one of the world’s safest and most economically vibrant communities and is Orange County’s second-largest employer, contributing $7 billion annually to the local economy and $8 billion statewide. For more on UC Irvine, visit www.uci.edu.

Media access: Radio programs/stations may, for a fee, use an on-campus studio with a Comrex IP audio codec to interview UC Irvine faculty and experts, subject to availability and university approval. For more UC Irvine news, visit news.uci.edu. Additional resources for journalists may be found at https://news.uci.edu/media-resources.

 

Europeans are increasingly worried about climate change



Over the past decade, environmental concern among Europeans grew, despite migration, financial crises and the COVID‑19 pandemic – rising to become the third most important issue after health and the economy.



Kaunas University of Technology

Prof. AudronÄ— TeleÅ¡ienÄ— 

image: 

Prof. Audronė Telešienė, chief editor, Kaunas University of Technology. Lithuania

view more 

Credit: KTU






Over the past decade, environmental concern among Europeans grew, despite migration, financial crises and the COVID19 pandemic rising to become the third most important issue after health and the economy. Over the same period, climate change moved from being one of many problems to the most important environmental issue in Europe.

These and other insights into European environmental attitudes are analysed in detail in a new monograph, Green European Revisited, published by Palgrave Macmillan Cham. This is the second volume by the same team, again focusing on how Europeans think about environmental issues over time.

“There is a myth, which I hear time and time again, that Europe is a so-called green continent,” Professor AudronÄ— TeleÅ¡ienÄ—, a researcher at Kaunas University of Technology (KTU), Lithuania, the chief editor of the book, says, “whereas in reality, Europe has placed exceptionally heavy pressures on the natural environment, greater in some respects than those generated by several other continents combined. As the first continent to industrialise, it has experienced extensive and long-term ecosystem degradation.”

However, she emphasises that Europeans demonstrate leadership in implementing green policies that can help the world to deal with the climate crisis and its impacts.

Nordic Countries Are Most Concerned

In one of the chapters of the book, KTU researchers Professors AudronÄ— TeleÅ¡ienÄ— and AistÄ— BalžekienÄ— analyse data on environmental attitudes in different European countries from the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP), comparing the 2010–2012 wave with data collected between 2020 and 2023.

“In the years between 2010 and 2020, the world has gone through several global shocks. In 2010 we were in the midst of a financial crisis, in 2015–2016 we had the migration crisis, in 2020 the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of the survey data were collected after 2022, when the war in Ukraine started. We wanted to see whether these overlapping crises shifted Europeans’ attention away from the environment,” says Prof. TeleÅ¡ienÄ—.

Contrary to what is often assumed, the polycrises – from finance to war – did not push the environment off the public agenda – quite the opposite. In 2010, Europeans saw the economy and health as the main challenges facing their countries; by 2020, health had become the number one (in the context of COVID), but the environment also moved up and overtook some other topics, even though one might expect it to drop off the agenda in times of crisis.

Moreover, climate change has become established as the defining issue of our era, with 30% of Europeans indicating it as the most important environmental issue (compared with 15% in 2010).

“The sharpest rise in concern about climate change was in the Nordic countries, with Iceland showing the biggest jump – from 13 to 43%. In other countries, instead of naming climate change itself, people became more worried about its direct consequences, such as heatwaves or water shortages,” says Prof. BalžekienÄ—, Head of the KTU Civil Society and Sustainability Research Group, a co-author of the book chapter.

From Floods to Parrots in Poland

According to Prof. BalžekienÄ—, this difference partly reflects how people understand the term itself. Climate change can be seen in a theoretical way – as a systemic, global phenomenon that may affect a country indirectly, for example through increased migration, even if there are no obvious local signs yet. It can also be understood empirically – through its concrete consequences.

“For example, heatwaves in Southern Europe attract a great deal of political and media attention. Climate change is often linked to flash floods in regions that were not historically prone to them. People also start talking about unusual phenomena, such as seeing parrots in the wild in Poland – an issue directly related to climate change,” explains Prof. BalžekienÄ—.

In Spain, concern about water scarcity is particularly strong (almost 38% named this as the most important problem, and about 30% named climate change). In France, concern about pesticides and chemicals is particularly pronounced, while in Italy concern about air pollution stands out – which also reflects objective indicators.

“Some of the most polluted cities in Europe are in Italy, Spain is experiencing water shortage, and France is the biggest exporter of pesticides. It is a good sign that people are recognising local problems,” says Prof. BalžekienÄ—, adding that data shows that Nordic countries, which lead in prioritising climate change as No.1 issue, are very aware of its local impacts.

Forest Fires and Heatwaves More Often Associated with Climate Change

The researchers believe several factors helped keep environmental concern high on the public agenda, even amid multiple crises. A series of major “discourse‑focusing” events – the Paris Climate Agreement and the UN Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, followed by the European Green Deal in 2019 – firmly anchored climate issues in political debates. Society-wide mobilisation, including Greta Thunberg’s activism and the Fridays for Future movement, made climate change far more visible. Finally, people increasingly began to experience the impacts of climate change firsthand.

“Forest fires, heatwaves and flash floods are more and more often associated with climate change. During the COVID‑19 pandemic, when much of the world’s economic activity paused, and short‑term environmental changes became visible, we started to see environmental issues in a new light. It made us realise that this is not only about the environment – it is about our overall safety and wellbeing,” says Prof. TeleÅ¡ienÄ—.

Research shows that awareness about climate change is strongly related to education. In this respect, there is also progress – according to Prof. BalžekienÄ—, many universities now offer study programmes and modules focused on sustainable development and environmental issues.

However, the researchers stress that awareness is only the first step and does not automatically lead to action. Are we prepared to change our lifestyles, to pay higher taxes to protect the environment? Do we believe that our own choices matter? Prof. Telešienė notes that several ISSP survey questions probe exactly these issues.

“In this respect, there is no single “green Europe”. In countries such as Switzerland, the Netherlands, Austria, Germany and Sweden, people have a strong sense of their power as citizens: they believe they can make a difference and are willing to change their lifestyle for environmental reasons. In contrast, in Bulgaria, Lithuania, Czechia, Hungary, Slovakia and Croatia, societies tend not to trust in their own agency and are much less willing to make personal changes,” says TeleÅ¡ienÄ—.

Eastern and Central European Countries Are Not All the Same

Prof. BalžekienÄ— notes that recognising the local impacts of climate change is one of the main drivers of pro‑environmental behaviour. It is therefore not surprising that the Nordic countries are in the lead, while many people in Central and Eastern Europe still tend to see climate change as something that happens elsewhere and expect authorities to deal with its consequences.

“I believe we need to talk much more about what climate change actually does. Agriculture, for example, is a sector that not only has to adapt, but can also reduce impacts by changing its practices. Climate change also affects human health. If we do not discuss these effects, irresponsible behaviour follows – such as older people staying outside during a heatwave,” says BalžekienÄ—.

In the 2020 survey, several countries remained at the very bottom in terms of prioritising the environment as their country’s most important issue. Hungary (2.2%), Croatia (2.4%), Slovenia (2.6%) and Slovakia (2.8%) recorded the lowest shares of respondents naming the environment as the top national problem, with only minimal change compared to 2010.

“These countries have very small shares of people who support green policies or show awareness and understanding of environmental issues. More broadly, some of those countries are also known in Europe for challenges in democratic processes and for differing interpretations of geopolitical events. It would be very interesting to compare how similar data from these countries evolve in the future,” says Prof. TeleÅ¡ienÄ—.

She adds that Eastern and Central Europe is not a single story: in countries like Lithuania and Estonia, concern about the environment has shifted from marginal to moderate levels over the past decade.

Climate Change Is Economically Damaging

Professors TeleÅ¡ienÄ— and BalžekienÄ— from KTU’s Civil Society and Sustainability Research Group also contributed to the preparation of the 7th Global Environment Outlook (GEO‑7), one of the world’s most authoritative assessments of the state of the global environment.

“GEO‑7 applies a whole-of-society approach: some solutions belong to governments (infrastructure, subsidies), some to business and industry, and some to society and scientists,” says Prof. TeleÅ¡ienÄ—. “Our Green European monograph shows that European societies are aware of the environmental crisis – not everyone is ready to change their lifestyle, but there is clear potential for transformation.”

While individuals can be committed to environmental protection, many key solutions lie beyond the scope of personal choice. Charging infrastructure for electric cars or heating systems in residential buildings, for example, are not always within the control of households. At the same time, KTU researchers point out that data clearly shows climate change is economically damaging – through destroyed infrastructure, a heavier burden of illness on health systems, crop losses and other costs – which makes societal transformation not only desirable but necessary.

“Data also shows that environmental crises increase the likelihood of armed conflicts. Besides, both the war in Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East are, at their core, largely energy wars. The way we have organised our economies makes us dependent on fossil fuels and on specific supplier countries,” says Prof. TeleÅ¡ienÄ—. “That is why I believe defence may become one of the sectors to adopt green transformation fastest – leaders in this field clearly see the strategic necessity.”

 

Political moderates may be perceived as disloyal by both sides



Polarization increasingly offers little room for moderates or the middle ground, study finds



American Psychological Association





WASHINGTON – In the increasingly polarized political realm, moderates may be viewed as disloyal by both conservatives and liberals when the opposing side seems threatening, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.  

“Democratic systems rely heavily on compromise, negotiation and coalition building, and moderates are often seen as the ‘glue’ that helps bridge ideological divides,” said lead researcher Giulia Maimone, PhD, a postdoctoral scholar in marketing at the University of Florida. “If moderates are rejected by both sides, compromise itself may begin to look suspicious or disloyal.” 

The study included five online experiments with more than 3,200 participants in the United States. The participants were asked about the strength of their own liberal or conservative beliefs about some politically divisive issues, including abortion, Israel and Palestine, or voting choices for Donald Trump or Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.  

In one experiment, the participants were asked to consider moderate policies that allowed abortions in the first trimester of a pregnancy. Both pro-life and pro-choice participants viewed the moderate policies as supporting the opposing side.  

In another experiment conducted five days before the 2024 presidential election, the participants were asked to consider the beliefs of a hypothetical individual who equally supported both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. The participants also were asked if they considered voting for one candidate over the other to be a moral issue and if they would feel threats to themselves, someone they know, or for society at large if the candidate from the opposing party was elected.  

Across the experiments, participants viewed moderate policies or beliefs as supporting the opposing side, especially when the participants held more extreme political beliefs, felt threatened by the opposing side and viewed political issues through a moral lens. This “moderate as out-group effect” is driven by perceptions that moderates fail to repudiate or condemn the opposing side, Maimone said. 

“Our findings suggest polarization can become self-perpetuating because distrust spreads not only toward extremists on opposing sides but also toward people attempting to bridge divides in the middle,” Maimone said.  

Another danger of viewing moderates as belonging to the opposing side is that moderates may realize they are rejected by all sides, and become incentivized to pick a side, further deepening polarization. However, there is still some hope for reducing polarization and rebuilding the middle ground, Maimone said.  

“Reducing the moralized language around some political debates and not demonizing political opponents so they would seem less threatening could help make political cooperation feel more socially acceptable,” Maimone said. “Over time, this may help create the conditions for real dialogue across political parties where nuance and compromise are valued rather than punished, potentially reducing polarization.” 

Article: “Whoever Is Not With Me Is Against Me: The ‘Moderate as Out-Group’ Effect,” Giulia Maimone, PhD, University of Florida, and Craig R. M. McKenzie, PhD, University of California, San Diego. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, published online July 27, 2026. 

Contact: Giulia Maimone, PhD, may be contacted at giulia.maimone@warrington.ufl.edu.