We are living through the teenage angst of the 21st century: a post-truth era in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than manipulative appeals to emotions and personal beliefs. Buffeted by alternative truths, counterintuitive truths and opposing truths, we are exhorted to sift out grains of scientific truth. This is no small task. As William James, the 19th-century philosopher and psychologist, claimed: “There is nothing so absurd that it cannot be believed as truth if repeated often enough.” Picking through myriad facts and controversies conveyed in a jumble of scientific jargon, scientific misinformation or media hype is time-consuming and not for the faint-hearted. Add to the mix the influences of political agendas and ideologies – as well as monetary motivations – and it should come as no surprise that citizens (and scientists) struggle to separate scientific substance from spin. As Cornelia Dean states succinctly in this well-written book, we live in a world where “researchers gather data; politicians, business executives, or activists spin it; journalists misinterpret or hype it, and the rest of us don’t get it”. As if these external influences weren’t enough to contend with, there is the sink of irrationality that is the human mind. Dean deftly sketches how our ability to cut to the scientific truth is hampered by our inbuilt hardwiring and acquired belief systems. This is especially true when we are asked to make decisions or draw conclusions using the primitive risk and reasoning skills we have inherited from our ancient ancestors. Dean illustrates how this inherent vulnerability leaves us prone to manipulation that can be exploited by savvy lobbyists and influential stakeholders. So how do we separate scientific substance from spin? The first step, Dean explains, is to understand what science is and what it is not. This is not as easy as you might suppose, but she provides clues. Science asks and answers questions about the world around us, and it is naturally sceptical. Scientists set out to test and probe these answers using observation and experimentation. Any ideas that do not hold up to this scientific scrutiny are discarded. Dean puts it with admirable succinctness: “For an idea to be scientific it must have the capacity to be incorrect.” However, scientific progress does not happen in a vacuum. Substantial funding and investment is required to underpin the research process, and scientific progress offers potential for substantial wealth generation. Money influences research decisions that include what is researched, the chosen methodologies, the results that are reported, and the conclusions that are drawn. Whether we like it or not, the influence of money, the pace of scientific discovery and the amount of data being produced are all on the increase. Looking to the future, we need a scientifically literate society that is prepared to discuss and debate the ethical, political and legal issues emerging hand in hand with scientific progress. This engaging book offers non-scientists the tools to connect with and evaluate science, and for scientists it is a timely call to action for effective communication. Laura Bowater is professor of microbiology education and engagement, University of East Anglia, and author of The Microbes Fight Back: Antibiotic Resistance (2016). Making Sense of Science: Separating Substance from SpinBy Cornelia DeanHarvard University Press, 296pp, £15.95ISBN 9780674059696Published 30 March 2017 Please or to read this article Register to continue Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary. Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus: Sign up for the editor's highlights Receive World University Rankings news first Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches Participate in reader discussions and post comments Subscribe Or subscribe for unlimited access to: Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews Digital editions Digital access to THE’s university and college rankings analysis Unrestricted access to the UK and global edition of the THE app on IOS, Android and Kindle Fire Subscribe Already registered or a current subscriber? Have your say Log in or register to post comments Featured jobs Research Associate in Main Group/Organic/Organometallic Chemistry University Of Manchester Lecturer in Careers Guidance Coventry University Assistant/Associate Professor in Translation Studies Qatar University Postdoctoral Research Associate in Multisensory Development Durham University Human Resources Administrative Assistant Cern See all jobs Most Viewed The place of unions in the academy October 11, 2018 Best universities in the world September 26, 2018 Best universities in the UK September 26, 2018 Best universities in the United States September 26, 2018 Best universities in Canada September 26, 2018 Most Commented Group think: scholars assess the state of sociology October 4, 2018 Can universities beat contract cheating? September 13, 2018 What the ‘grievance studies’ hoax is really about October 4, 2018 An academic’s guide to writing well October 4, 2018 The place of unions in the academy October 11, 2018 You might also like The Great Rift: Literacy, Numeracy, and the Religion-Science Divide, by Michael E. Hobart August 9, 2018 Peru builds closer scientific links with Europe October 18, 2017 One in three top US professors educated overseas, study finds March 15, 2017 Anne Glover: make ‘best use’ of evidence to tackle mistrust October 27, 2016