<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LSE Impact</title>
	<atom:link href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences</link>
	<description>Understanding impact and practice in academic research</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 10:00:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.2</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">64384046</site>	<item>
		<title>Eager to please AI assistants smooth over the gaps in our thinking</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/21/eager-to-please-ai-assistants-smooth-over-the-gaps-in-our-own-thinking/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/21/eager-to-please-ai-assistants-smooth-over-the-gaps-in-our-own-thinking/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 10:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Academic writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Data and Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Assistants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Bias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI cognition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research integrity]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=56023</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>A competent paper used to prove a competent mind. It no longer does. The research integrity tools we have were built for fraud and for selective reporting. As Timothy Cook &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/21/eager-to-please-ai-assistants-smooth-over-the-gaps-in-our-own-thinking/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/21/eager-to-please-ai-assistants-smooth-over-the-gaps-in-our-own-thinking/">Eager to please AI assistants smooth over the gaps in our thinking</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/21/eager-to-please-ai-assistants-smooth-over-the-gaps-in-our-own-thinking/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">56023</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Without guidelines academic authorship defaults to power politics</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/20/without-guidelines-academic-authorship-defaults-to-power-politics/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/20/without-guidelines-academic-authorship-defaults-to-power-politics/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Academic publishing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Academic writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Early career researchers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Equity Diversity and Inclusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Academic Authorship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Academic Credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reward and recognition]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=56010</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>In many areas of social science co-authorship is the default. Drawing on a meta-analysis of academics in fields related to management, Lorenz Graf-Vlachy outlines a pervasive culture of questionable authorship &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/20/without-guidelines-academic-authorship-defaults-to-power-politics/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/20/without-guidelines-academic-authorship-defaults-to-power-politics/">Without guidelines academic authorship defaults to power politics</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/20/without-guidelines-academic-authorship-defaults-to-power-politics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">56010</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Matthew effect in AI summary</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/19/the-matthew-effect-in-ai-summary/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/19/the-matthew-effect-in-ai-summary/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 10:30:33 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Academic publishing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Data and Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Libraries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Academic Inequality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Research Tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI Summary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[citations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matthew Effect]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=56004</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>At the heart of AI applications to scholarly communication are processes of summarisation and the ranking &#160;of “too much” information. Considering how unequal dynamics of attention, such as the Matthew &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/19/the-matthew-effect-in-ai-summary/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/19/the-matthew-effect-in-ai-summary/">The Matthew effect in AI summary</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/19/the-matthew-effect-in-ai-summary/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">56004</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is it really bad that only 50% of social science papers are reproducible?</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/18/is-it-really-bad-that-only-50-of-social-science-papers-are-reproducible/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/18/is-it-really-bad-that-only-50-of-social-science-papers-are-reproducible/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 10:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Experts and Expertise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LSE comment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[replication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reproducibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robustness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social science]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=55993</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Three new papers in Nature from the SCORE project find that around half of social science studies hold up under replication, reproducibility, and robustness tests. Many commentators have read this &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/18/is-it-really-bad-that-only-50-of-social-science-papers-are-reproducible/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/18/is-it-really-bad-that-only-50-of-social-science-papers-are-reproducible/">Is it really bad that only 50% of social science papers are reproducible?</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/18/is-it-really-bad-that-only-50-of-social-science-papers-are-reproducible/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">55993</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Extra time is not inclusion – Why redesigning assessments benefits all students</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/14/extra-time-is-not-inclusion-why-redesigning-assessments-benefits-all-students/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/14/extra-time-is-not-inclusion-why-redesigning-assessments-benefits-all-students/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2026 10:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Equity Diversity and Inclusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Higher education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Accelerated Academy Series]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[higher education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inclusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neurodiversity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Timed Examination]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=55983</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>For many higher education institutions the default way to accommodate neurodiverse students in assessment is to provide extra time. Drawing on the principles of Universal Design for Learning, Malak Benslama-Dabdoub &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/14/extra-time-is-not-inclusion-why-redesigning-assessments-benefits-all-students/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/14/extra-time-is-not-inclusion-why-redesigning-assessments-benefits-all-students/">Extra time is not inclusion – Why redesigning assessments benefits all students</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/14/extra-time-is-not-inclusion-why-redesigning-assessments-benefits-all-students/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">55983</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Qualitative research can and should be more open and reproducible</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/13/qualitative-research-can-and-should-be-more-open-and-reproducible/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/13/qualitative-research-can-and-should-be-more-open-and-reproducible/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Academic publishing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LSE comment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Access]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[open science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Social Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[qualitative research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research methods]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=55969</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Qualitative social scientists have lagged behind their quantitative colleagues in adopting open social science approaches to research. Discussing their new book, Patrick Dunleavy and Timothy Monteath outline numerous different strategies &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/13/qualitative-research-can-and-should-be-more-open-and-reproducible/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/13/qualitative-research-can-and-should-be-more-open-and-reproducible/">Qualitative research can and should be more open and reproducible</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/13/qualitative-research-can-and-should-be-more-open-and-reproducible/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">55969</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legal jeopardy shouldn’t determine who can research digital platforms</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/12/legal-jeopardy-shouldnt-determine-who-can-research-digital-platforms/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/12/legal-jeopardy-shouldnt-determine-who-can-research-digital-platforms/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 10:03:42 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[AI Data and Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research integrity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Soical Media data]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=55962</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Calls for evidence-based scrutiny of online platforms have intensified globally. But the capacity to produce evidence is unevenly distributed. Alexandra Boutopoulou argues legal uncertainty surrounding data access is creating a &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/12/legal-jeopardy-shouldnt-determine-who-can-research-digital-platforms/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/12/legal-jeopardy-shouldnt-determine-who-can-research-digital-platforms/">Legal jeopardy shouldn’t determine who can research digital platforms</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/12/legal-jeopardy-shouldnt-determine-who-can-research-digital-platforms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">55962</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Polls are a “public good”, they deserve to be better understood</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/11/polls-are-a-public-good-they-deserve-to-be-better-understood/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/11/polls-are-a-public-good-they-deserve-to-be-better-understood/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 10:01:26 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Academic communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Experts and Expertise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public engagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Knowledge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Understanding of Polls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surveys]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=55954</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Polls and surveys act as an important conduit between public opinion and decision making. They can even be seen as a democratic and public good. Considering the high levels of &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/11/polls-are-a-public-good-they-deserve-to-be-better-understood/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/11/polls-are-a-public-good-they-deserve-to-be-better-understood/">Polls are a “public good”, they deserve to be better understood</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/11/polls-are-a-public-good-they-deserve-to-be-better-understood/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">55954</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The costs of limiting academic freedom</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/08/the-costs-of-limiting-academic-freedom/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/08/the-costs-of-limiting-academic-freedom/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2026 10:00:47 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Academic communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Higher education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[academic freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[critical thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom of Speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[student skills]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=55949</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>The UK High Court’s recent decision in favour of Sussex university is the latest flashpoint in an ongoing debate on academic freedom. Chirantan&#160;Chatterjee argues attempts to narrow academic debate could &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/08/the-costs-of-limiting-academic-freedom/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/08/the-costs-of-limiting-academic-freedom/">The costs of limiting academic freedom</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/08/the-costs-of-limiting-academic-freedom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">55949</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>From microscopes to AI? New tools spark scientific discovery</title>
		<link>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/07/from-microscopes-to-ai-new-tools-spark-scientific-discovery/</link>
					<comments>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/07/from-microscopes-to-ai-new-tools-spark-scientific-discovery/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taster]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2026 11:01:36 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[AI Data and Society]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Experts and Expertise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LSE comment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Metascience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Infrastrucutre]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scientific Discoveries]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/?p=55941</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Scientific discoveries and the innovations that stem from them are pursued by governments and science policies seeking to ultimately drive human wellbeing. Drawing on the study of science’s major discoveries, &#8230; <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/07/from-microscopes-to-ai-new-tools-spark-scientific-discovery/">Continued</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/07/from-microscopes-to-ai-new-tools-spark-scientific-discovery/">From microscopes to AI? New tools spark scientific discovery</a> first appeared on <a href="https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences">LSE Impact</a>.</p>]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2026/05/07/from-microscopes-to-ai-new-tools-spark-scientific-discovery/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">55941</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
