Review by Choice Review
Isaac Asimov once said that "... science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom." In her book, author Dean, a science writer for the New York Times, writes to counter this conclusion. In five chapters, she explains how people interpret science in the current society, how science works (with particular emphasis on models), how science sometimes fails and is misused, how money can poison a just use and application of science and technology, and how science influences and is used or distorted by political institutions. Although the content reads slowly when modeling is described (e.g., chapter 2, "The Research Enterprise") and the description of money in science concentrates primarily on health-related fields (e.g., chapter 4, "The Universal Solvent"), this book is an accessible-by-all description of modern science and the societal gap of understanding. The most concise and useful portions of the book are found in the conclusion, where Dean briefly discusses how scientists and average citizens can make science accessible and comprehensible, and the appendix, where she provides a framework for deciding what claims, based on science, are, as the title puts it, "Trustworthy, Untrustworthy, or Irrelevant?" Summing Up: Recommended. All readers. --Charles Wayne Sokolik, Denison University
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review
Dean (Am I Making Myself Clear?), a science writer for the New York Times, guides readers through the often perplexing process of sorting conflicting reports on recent scientific developments. She moves step by step to aid the general public in assessing "the scientific and technical claims and counterclaims" with which they are regularly bombarded. Dean lays out how important it is to admit ignorance and examine the sources of information on a particular subject. Crucially, terms in everyday use have different meanings in scientific contexts. The most misunderstood is "theory," which is not a fuzzy idea but something that has been examined, repeatedly tested, and supported by a vast body of evidence. Dean points out matters that cause confusion and distrust, particularly the large amount of basic research funded by private companies-a great source of conflicts of interest. She also examines political influence, noting that members of Congress are barely more scientifically literate than the general public. This bolsters her argument that voters need to know how to evaluate scientific claims-an argument that she details in an appendix. Dean's excellent primer will be welcomed by those who find themselves lost in the fog of rival claims about scientific issues that affect us all. (Mar.) © Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved.
(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
Review by Library Journal Review
Lacking background to assess critically the work of clinical, scientific, and technical researchers, many accept oversimplified or distorted interpretations by politicians and journalists. Yet if we settle for misinformation, we risk facing a future in which government or industry implements unregulated dangerous technologies without consideration of their impact while suppressing useful but inconvenient scientific findings. New York Times science journalist Dean (Am I Making Myself Clear? A Scientist's Guide to Talking to the Public) hopes to remedy our deficits and improve public policymaking with this research primer and evaluation toolkit. She succeeds in part, describing scientists' mind-sets and the funding-investigation-publication cycle, presenting research assessment checklists, and listing action points for concerned citizens. Unfortunately, Dean dilutes her message through digression and needless repetition. Verdict Unequivocally supportive of mainstream science and more politicized than Moti Ben-Ari's Just a Theory: Exploring the Nature of Science, this title might be ignored by those most in need of it. However, current and future scientists and journalists, as well as advocates for science, will appreciate Dean's effort to combat scientific illiteracy.-Nancy R. Curtis, Univ. of Maine Lib., Orono © Copyright 2017. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
(c) Copyright Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
Review by Kirkus Book Review
That "the human mind is a sink of irrationality" is the assumption behind this engagingly written guidebook.New York Times science writer Dean (Writer in Residence/Brown Univ.) previously approached this situation from another tack in Am I Making Myself Clear?: A Scientist's Guide to Talking to the Public (2012). Here, she aims to help the public deal with "a world in which researchers gather data, politicians, business executives, or activists spin it, journalists misinterpret or hype it, and the rest of us don't get it." Not only are we irrational, but we are mostly ignorant about science, and Dean explores both the reasons and the effects, including our erroneous ideas about probability and risk. With dozens of examples, many from recent events, she explains how science is taught or not taught in schools (nearly a third of science teachers are creationists), how scientific research works, how it is financed, and how it is influenced by politics and religion. Among the many topics Dean introduces are climate change, genetically modified organisms, organic foods, cancer screenings, cloning claims, genome engineering, medical malpractice litigation, misconduct of researchers, and the defects of cost-benefit analysis. She also reveals the disconnects between science and law and between science and religion. Advice for the nonscientist aboundse.g., don't accept anything at face value, consider the source, beware of stories about trends, and keep in mind that the plural of "anecdote" is not "evidence." For patients facing treatment decisions, Dean even provides lists of questions to ask the doctor. Her summarizing list of recommendations for nonscientists includes the admonition to acknowledge ignorance and uncertainty, to consider other views by sources outside one's comfort zone, and when it comes to conclusions, consider it again. Dean's long and varied experience in the world of science reporting makes for an articulate, well-structured, and easily understood account filled with good stories and sound advice. Copyright Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.
Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.
