Check the numbers

Of the 92 in the experimental group, 75 responded to the letter, of whom only 68 supplied data or code, despite the fact that these authors were made aware, at the time of submission, that their data and code would be requested. [...] The archive was reborn in 1996, with a policy stating that for empirical arti- cles, the author “must provide the JMCB with the data and programs used in generat- ing the reported results or persuade the editor that doing so is infeasible.” McCullough, McGeary, and Harrison (2006) attempted to use the archive to deter- mine whether a mandatory data/code archive produces replicable research. [...] In early 1994, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee of the US EPA wrote to the EPA administra- tor asking her to obtain the data behind the study. [...] It is in the light of the post-1992 sub-prime mortgage bubble that we turn to the question of the reliability of the Boston Fed Study. [...] The report makes scathing comments about the poor quality of the Gerberding study, the lack of expertise of the authors, the use of outdated data, and the political over- tones to the paper (Couzin, 2005).