Conclusion: Junk Social Science: Its Patrons and Its Audience

This incident, as reported by The (UK) Guardian, brought unwanted attention to a powerful private think tank and illuminated the nature of a key think-tank activity: producing and publishing advocacy research. The primary goal of advocacy research publications is not a search for truth— it is to create the impression that a favored policy position has authoritative intellectual and scientific support. These publications are not meant to bear critical scrutiny any more than, for example, is any science behind the claim that four out of five dentists recommend sugarless gum for their patients who chew gum. This junk science is what Susan Sarnoff calls “sanctified snake oil,” and it is a key way that money is used to drive policy.²