Quite many (if not most of) scientific articles, related to computational sciences, which I have seen, do not share both data and code leading to the figures.
This may have of course good reasons due to other than scientific, still substantial aspects involving intellectual property and data protection laws.
Not widely known (less than 1000 Google results) is though this quote on reproducible science:
An article about computational science in a scientific publication is not the scholarship itself, it is merely advertising of the scholarship. The actual scholarship is the complete ... set of instructions [and data] which generated the figures. (David Donoho, 1998)
Obviously, scientists trying to climb on the giants' shoulders should experience more and more difficulties with growing science complexity.
Then, there is also a set of "TOP" (Transparency and Openness Promotion) guidelines to establish science reproducibility.
According to the CoS, Center for Open Science:
Over 5,000 journals and organizations have already become signatories of the TOP Guidelines.
There are of course open access journals, but this is about free distribution of articles (very good but not necessarily reproducible).
Now my question is, is this TOP model elsewhere binding or is it sort of idealistic: specifically, are there journals/universities really inforcing the highest Level 3?
Level 3: Data [and code] must be posted to a trusted repository, and reported analyses will be reproduced independently prior to publication.
- "Building Research Integrity Through Reproducibility University of Utah" Victoria Stodden, 2018 slides