Latest news with #ScienceMediaCentre
Otago Daily Times
3 hours ago
- Health
- Otago Daily Times
Boost in job satisfaction, health: four-day work week benefits
Working less could give us more, a new study suggests. Four-day work weeks without a reduction in income are found to boost workers' job satisfaction and physical and mental health, driven by enhanced work performance, lower levels of fatigue and fewer sleep problems, new research suggests. The findings, published in Nature Human Behaviour, highlight the potential for organisations and policymakers to improve employee well-being by re-evaluating workplace hours. Initiatives that reduce working hours — such as a six-hour workday or a 20% reduction in working time — have recently been trialled around the world. For example, the 4 Day Week Global initiative has run trials in many countries, with participation from about 375 companies, to understand how a shortened work week — without a reduction in pay — can result in a better working environment. To test the effects of the four-day work week (with no reduction in worker pay) intervention, Wen Fan, Juliet Schor and colleagues conducted six-month trials that involved 2896 employees across 141 organisations in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, Ireland and the USA. Using survey data, they compared work- and health-related indicators (including burnout, job satisfaction, mental and physical health) before and after the intervention. They also compared these outcomes with those from 285 employees at 12 companies that did not trial the intervention. Fan and colleagues found that after the four-day work week intervention, there was a reduction in average working hours of about five hours per week. Employees with a reduction of eight hours or more per work week self-reported experiencing larger reductions in burnout and improvements in job satisfaction and mental health, as compared with those at companies that maintained a five-day workweek. Similar, though smaller, effects were observed among employees with between one and four hour and five and seven hour reductions in their work week. These benefits were partially explained by a reduced number of sleeping problems and levels of fatigue, and improved individual work ability. The authors suggest that shorter work weeks and reduced working hours without a reduction in salary can help to improve job satisfaction and worker health. They note that a key limitation of the study was companies self-selecting to participate, and resulted in a sample that consists predominantly of smaller companies from English-speaking countries. — Science Media Centre
Scoop
3 days ago
- Health
- Scoop
Global Study Finds 4-Day Work Week Linked To Improved Wellbeing
A four-day work week is linked to improved employee wellbeing and job satisfaction, according to trials in over 140 organisations across six countries including New Zealand. A US and Irish research team ran six-month trials involving almost 3000 employees at 141 organisations, reducing their hours to four days a week without a pay reduction. Compared with employees at 12 companies that didn't shorten their work weeks, the workers reported improvements in burnout, job satisfaction, and physical and mental health. The researchers say the improvements were mostly driven by the workers reporting fewer sleep problems, less fatigue, and greater work ability. The Science Media Centre asked third-party experts to comment. Dr Dougal Sutherland, Principal Psychologist, Umbrella Wellbeing, comments: 'Findings from research over the last decade have been generally positive about the effectiveness of a four-day work week at full pay for employee wellbeing and company performance. However, much of the published research has been limited by difficult data collection conditions, lacking controls and longitudinal data. 'This study sets a new standard, finding across a large sample that employee wellbeing improved over a six-month trial period when work hours were reduced, explained in part by increases in people's perceived productivity, sleep and energy. One important factor contributing to the trial's success, no doubt, was that participating organisations were coached in the weeks before the trial to find smarter ways of working for staff, streamlining processes, and reducing unnecessary meetings or tasks. Reducing work hours without any supporting workplace scaffolds is unlikely to produce the same results. 'As organisations continue to look for innovative ways to improve wellbeing, this study offers a strong business case for businesses to work smarter, rather than longer, to keep workers and their work output strong.' Conflict of interest statement: Umbrella Wellbeing provides workplace wellbeing services to organisations. Associate Professor Paula O'Kane, Otago Business School, University of Otago, comments: 'It's great to see growing evidence that reductions in working hours can significantly impact well-being, reduce burnout and improve job satisfaction. Traditionally, time spent working is used as a proxy for productivity, when in fact better rested and healthier people can be more productive in less time. The four-day week model in this study enhanced work ability, reduced sleep problems, and decreased fatigue—all of which contributed to the positive outcomes. While the study centred on a four-day week, the broader implication is clear: flexible and potentially individualised working arrangements can deliver similar benefits. 'Interestingly, many organisations who participated in the trial were not-for-profits, who often offer flexibility in lieu of higher salaries, perhaps the for-profit sector can learn from them. Although self-report measures have limitations, the study effectively addressed many of these. It was also insightful to examine both average company-wide reductions and individual-level changes in working hours.'
Scoop
09-07-2025
- Business
- Scoop
NZ's First National AI Strategy Released
The strategy released yesterday afternoon is a signal of 'unwavering support for private sector investment in AI,' the government says. The strategy document says NZ's use of Artificial Intelligence 'shows promise but requires acceleration,' and that the government's role includes reducing barriers, providing regulatory guidance, building capability, and ensuring responsible adoption. The document itself was also 'written with the assistance of AI.' The Science Media Centre asked experts to comment. Dr Collin Bjork, Senior Lecturer in Communication at Massey University, comments: 'This announcement makes plain the government's full-throated support for AI investment across all sectors (especially medical, agriculture, and education) due to its perceived economic benefits, which are almost certainly overblown, and some clearly expressed FOMO. But other than adding their voices to the AI hype train, this government announcement is a bit of a 'nothing burger' on multiple levels. 'On one level, it's a nothing burger because the government promises very little in the way of new policies or investments around AI. Instead, they largely point to existing investments and policies that were already in the works and that they believe will help with AI uptake. 'On another level, it's a nothing burger because it articulates no practical steps to ensure AI safety and ethics because the government prefers instead to take a 'light touch' that relies on existing legislation rather than new regulation. But the problem is that a chunk of our existing legislation is out of date. While other countries have passed media legislation to regulate the Silicon Valley tech giants, Aotearoa New Zealand is behind in this area. And many of these same tech giants are also the largest players in AI. 'This announcement maintains the AI status quo. And the status quo isn't good enough yet. Kiwis would benefit from coupling strategic investment with critical regulation. But we don't need the empty carbs of more AI hype.' No conflicts of interest. Dr Karaitiana Taiuru (Ngāi Tahu, Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngāti Toa), AI and Tech Governor at Taiuru & Associates and Director at the Institute of AI Governance, comments: 'While 'Te Tiriti' does not specifically have its own headings in the strategy documents, throughout the documents are tens of references to Māori and Māori Data, tikanga, cultural considerations and actions. There are also case studies of Māori AI businesses. Overall, these all equate to the principles of Te Tiriti and offer a fair and representative consideration of Māori with AI. 'Research reflects that most big tech and many smaller NZ tech companies are adopting Tiriti and Māori views already, as are about 50% of government agencies in relation to AI and Data. 'In addition to the strategy documents, we must also consider that StatsNZ are guided by ' The Data and Statistics Act 2022 ' which has a Tiriti clause, noting that StatsNZ have an agreement with Iwi Leaders Forum Data Group for data consultation, as does the Department of Internal Affairs, and that both departments have committed millions of dollars to partnerships. 'As well as Te Tiriti, there are also many other legal instruments to protect Māori rights – it's not unusual for them to be left out of legislation or strategies, but they still exist and provide protection for Māori rights when it comes to AI and data.' Conflicts of interest: Chair of the Kāhui Māori at the AI Forum. Associate Professor Adrian Clark, School of Product Design, University of Canterbury, comments: 'The national AI strategy provides a sensible approach towards increasing adoption of AI in the New Zealand private sector, focusing on the application of AI technology within key economic sectors such as agriculture, healthcare, education and business rather than trying to compete with large technology companies in foundational AI. I agree with this approach in the Generative AI space, however I believe NZ can still compete internationally in non-generative AI research. 'Beyond economic initiatives, the strategy presents several NZ case studies in driving AI innovation, including some where New Zealand is uniquely positioned to be a world leader. For example, Te Hiku Media and KIWA Digital are utilising AI technology for Indigenous Language Preservation through speech recognition and media localisation respectively, and Manatū Taonga's 'Amplify' strategy highlights the importance of protecting the creative and cultural sectors from AI-related threats. 'The largest, and perhaps most significant, part of the strategy discusses barriers to AI adoption in NZ and how the government is planning to address them. These barriers include widespread concerns such as ethical and responsible use of AI and replacement of humans in the workforce, however I felt the response to these concerns would have benefited from more detail.' Conflict of interest statement: 'I have a grant application under consideration to research AI in education.' Dr Andrew Lensen, Senior Lecturer/Programme Director of Artificial Intelligence, Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington, comments: 'As expected, the Government's AI Strategy is heavy on economic growth opportunities but worryingly light on the ethical and societal issues of AI. The Strategy takes a 'light-touch and principles-based approach', all but ruling out new legislation for managing the risks of AI. The Strategy suggests that new legislation is unnecessary, which I, and many other AI researchers, disagree with. Having 'Principles' is not nearly sufficient to reduce AI-induced harm, bias, and inequity—we need clear legislation and well-resourced enforcement mechanisms to ensure AI does not further harm New Zealanders. 'The AI Strategy does not mention The Treaty of Waitangi—not even once. Māori face unique risks from AI, with most modern AI systems being sourced from overseas Western contexts, which have been designed with Western values in mind. Consider, for example, a healthcare AI system sourced from the USA—how can there be no guidance in the AI Strategy about the need to validate and refine such systems for the unique demographics of our society? 'This AI Strategy sets a dangerous path forward for New Zealand, with an attitude of economic growth above social good.'
Scoop
25-06-2025
- Science
- Scoop
The First Test Images From The Brand New Vera C. Rubin Observatory Have Been Revealed To The Public
Press Release – Science Media Centre Inside the Vera C Rubin telescope is the largest camera ever built, University of Canterbury computational astrophysicist Dr John Forbes told Stuff. The telescope, located atop Cerro Pachón in central Chile, is focused on the Southern Hemisphere sky. After one year of operation it's expected to generate more optical astronomy data than that produced by all previous telescopes combined. The telescope is named after US astronomer Vera Rubin, who produced the first persuasive results supporting the theory of dark matter. A titan of a camera Inside the Vera C Rubin telescope is the largest camera ever built, University of Canterbury computational astrophysicist Dr John Forbes told Stuff. 'The telescope is looking for changes in the night sky,' he said, 'so when something changes – an object in the Solar System moves across the sky, or an interesting supernova explodes – alerts will go out and we'll be able to follow up on it.' Kiwi scientists to play key role The Universities of Canterbury and Auckland are both contributors to Rubin, UC planetary astronomer Dr Michele Bannister told the Science Media Centre. 'We are the first follow-up telescopes in the South after Chile,' Dr Bannister said. Answering questions, big and small The telescope can see objects about halfway to the edge of the universe, University of Auckland cosmologist Richard Easther told RNZ Morning Report. 'Over the next few years, Rubin hopes to find most of the tiny rocks in the solar system,' Professor Easther said. 'It also hopes to be able to figure out the speed at which the universe is expanding, which is a big challenge for us at the moment – to make sense of exactly how the universe is expanding and what's driving that.'
Scoop
13-06-2025
- General
- Scoop
Plane Crash In Ahmedabad
Press Release – Science Media Centre The airline, Air India, said 229 passengers and 12 crew members were killed in the crash; it has confirmed there is one survivor. A 787 Dreamliner aircraft carrying 242 people crashed last night (NZ time) shortly after taking off in the city of Ahmedabad in western India. The airline, Air India, said 229 passengers and 12 crew members were killed in the crash; it has confirmed there is one survivor. The flight was bound for London, and the plane's history shows it regularly flies between India and destinations including Paris, Frankfurt, Tokyo, Amsterdam, and Melbourne. The SMC asked experts to comment. Emeritus Professor David O'Hare, Department of Psychology, University of Otago, comments: Note: Emeritus Professor O'Hare has researched pilot decision making and aviation safety. 'Obviously, air accident investigation is a data-driven exercise and until the flight data recordings are analysed it's impossible to give any definitive answers. 'I have looked at the data available on FlightRadar24 which shows the aircraft reached 675ft above ground level. The rate of climb appears lower than normal (approximately half as much as the flight the previous day) which could be caused by a number of factors: Engine power loss – the pilots monitor engine power carefully during take-off and could reject the take off if there was a problem. This does not seem to have been the case here as take off was continued and the aircraft rotated and began to climb out. Flap setting – an incorrect flap setting could compromise climb out performance. Retracting the flaps too early can cause loss of lift. The data recordings will show exactly what happened with the flaps. Undercarriage – if the undercarriage failed to retract then this would cause excess drag and loss of lift. Again, this will be shown on the flight data recorder. 'This aircraft appears to have had a normal take off roll but something has compromised the climb out performance. This might be something to do with the undercarriage and/or the flaps or something else entirely (e.g. Bird strike although a double strike affecting both engines is extremely rare). 'Air transport is exceedingly safe with very few accidents. The majority of these do occur on either take off or landing. 'Horrific events like this can make air travel appear less safe but these events are exceedingly rare and NZ and Pacific journalists should know that airlines in this region have some of the best safety records in the world.' No conflicts declared. Our colleagues at the Australian Science Media Centre have also gathered expert comments. Additional expert comments are available on Scimex. Professor Paul Salmon is from the Centre for Human Factors and Sociotechnical Systems at the University of the Sunshine Coast: 'Whilst the exact circumstances of the Air India Flight 171 crash are not known, what we can be sure of is that multiple contributory factors will have interacted to create the incident. Though there is often a strong focus on the flight crew and their behaviour in the immediate aftermath of such incidents, we also typically see contributory factors relating to the aircraft and its design, airports and air traffic controllers, the airline and its policies, procedures, and processes (e.g., training, maintenance, risk assessment), the aircraft manufacturer, regulatory bodies, and government to name only a few. 'In the case of Air India Flight 171, whilst there are some early indicators of what may have happened, it is important to let the investigation take its course. This will be exhaustive, will adopt a systems thinking perspective, and will be underpinned by a no-blame approach. 'Critically, rather than seeking to identify 'human errors' which are misleading and often prevent learning, the investigation will seek to understand why the flight crew's actions made sense to them at the time. This perspective will enable us to understand the full network of contributory factors involved and will reveal how the overall aviation system failed.' Paul has not declared any conflicts of interest. Salim Hijazeen is an Aviation Lecturer at Swinburne University of Technology: 'While the full circumstances surrounding Air India flight AI171, operated by a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, are still emerging, we must refrain from speculation and wait for investigators to conduct a thorough, evidence-based review. 'My deepest thoughts are with the families and loved ones affected by this tragedy. 'The Boeing 787 Dreamliner entered service in 2011 and is a technologically advanced long-haul aircraft operated by airlines such as Qantas and Jetstar globally. It features a carbon fibre composite fuselage, highly fuel-efficient engines, and advanced safety redundancies, including real-time systems monitoring and enhanced flight control protections designed to assist crews in complex scenarios. 'Incidents involving modern commercial aircraft are rare. When they do occur, they are rigorously investigated by independent safety bodies. The aviation industry operates under some of the world's most stringent safety regulations. 'As confronting as this event is, it is through careful investigation and shared learning that the aviation sector continues to improve.' Salim has not declared any conflicts of interest. Professor Sidney Dekker is a Professor in the School of Humanities, Languages and Social Science, and Director of the Safety Science Innovation Lab at Griffith University: 'Commercial aviation is very well protected (with multiple redundancies, layers of defence, procedures) against the deleterious effects of single errors or failures. Accidents are the result of a line-up or concatenation of multiple causes and contributors, all necessary and only jointly sufficient to push a system over the edge into catastrophe. 'The inability to gain adequate height after take-off can have a number of reasons, related to for instance the inability of the engines to produce adequate thrust (which itself can have a host of different reasons) or the configuration of the airframe/wings/wingflaps, or a combination of both (which itself can once again have a number of reasons). 'Investigations take time and often prove initial speculations wrong.'
