but in political environments where data on public opinions have been historically scarce or unreliable (e.g. China, Russia, etc).
However, my question here is that I noticed that the authors emphasize the data used in the paper as a major contribution to the literature (e.g. because it was collected from online textual data and the effort it takes to clean and prepare the data for the analysis).
As a junior social science researcher, I was wondering if it makes sense to write a paper where one emphasizes that a main contribution to the literature is the originality and uniqueness of the data used? Specifically, I have been trained in my PhD program that it is the questions and results that make a paper 'good', rather than the uniqueness of the data, but then I am noticing more and more political science papers that may study a question already addressed in democratic countries, but the contribution is that it's currently studied in an autocratic country like China.