These types of arguments should be made by peer reviewers. Addressing these makes the paper (and research) stronger.<p>Unfortunately, there is a lot of internal corruption in academia, which makes this feedback ineffective. If you apply for a grant, you already have to outline results of our research. Heather Sarsons, the author, is a doctoral fellow in the &quot;Inequality and Social Policy program&quot;. She is paid to find inequality. If she won&#x27;t find any, she would be unsuccessful. The same holds for colleagues--who actually do peer review. They are on the same ship.<p>It&#x27;s not a critique of this work, but the overall climate in academia. About 80% of papers in health science was found to be unreproducible. Guess why.