Research

Put simply: this line asks how people notice a warning sign, understand it, and decide what to do about it — and why that process sometimes breaks down.

My work on cognitive friction and human risk examines how people learn, interpret information, and make decisions in agricultural settings, particularly when working with tools, technologies, and complex systems. This line of inquiry focuses on how mental models, prior experience, and instructional design shape safety, learning, and behavior in agricultural education and training contexts. Across this work, I study when instructional approaches reduce confusion and risk, and when they unintentionally increase error, misinterpretation, or unsafe practice.

Put simply: this line asks whether people actually tell each other about a hazard, and whether that warning gets believed and acted on.

My research on relational safety culture focuses on the social and cultural conditions that shape safety, learning, and professional practice in agriculture. Rather than treating safety as an individual responsibility alone, this work examines how relationships, communication norms, leadership signals, and organizational structures influence whether risks are recognized, discussed, and addressed. This strand of research draws heavily on leadership, communication, and organizational perspectives within agricultural education and Extension.

Put simply: this line asks whether the agricultural workforce has enough trained people, in the right roles, to keep the system safe when things go wrong.

My work on agricultural work systems resilience examines the people, roles, skills, and structures that allow agricultural systems to function safely and adapt over time. This research focuses on workforce capacity, training systems, and institutional supports that sustain agricultural education, Extension, and community-based work under changing conditions. This line of inquiry explicitly connects education, leadership, and safety to broader system viability.