[ZeroGravitas]

The datacolada post makes the very reasonable request that all data should be released, and scientists should make that a standard thing to do by doing it themselves and requesting others do it.

It feels like this could be applied retroactively too.

In this case the 2012 authors still had the data that they released in 2020 which is how the analysis got done that showed evidence of fraud. Might be worth just asking a whole bunch of people to release data they previously hadn't and collectively putting some time and effort into that.

[nomoreplease]

Is there a way to make it licensed? Like “if you use our paper or data, then you also need to publish yours”.

[huitzitziltzin]

It’s not possible to release data in all circumstances. If you work with health data (I have worked with birth certificates, EMRs, inpatient discharge abstracts, drug prescription histories and other data) you can’t post it publicly. You have to promise not to include a table in the paper with a cell size of fewer than ten individuals!

For what it’s worth, the Trump administration attempted to make issuing new health and environmental regs harder by requiring public data disclosure. They did this entirely because they knew that much of the data could not be disclosed. So if you were studying, eg, the effects of some pollutant on a health outcome using private data, you wouldn’t be able to rely on that study in a regulatory context bc the data could not be published.

It’s a worthy idea, but there are exceptions for good reasons.