Yes, though this has been a huge charge for guys like Levitt/Dubner (Freakonomics authors) - that data sets must be published in tandem with conclusions based o

Yes, though this has been a huge charge for guys like Levitt/Dubner (Freakonomics authors) - that data sets must be published in tandem with conclusions based on said data. (Assuming, of course, the data sets are not publicly available. It does no good to reproduce census data and the like!) You should see how bad it is in my field of study - biomechanics. It's a pure black box. We have total cronyism, where one reviewer has disproportional power since he was the first to publish much of the modern stuff. Therefore, people will do anything to have him review their papers, and his papers are pushed through despite what many feel are seriously glaring errors in methodology and collection. This is the walled garden crap that turns me off to "peer-reviewed research."