The situation is out of control. I've also seen that during peer review a reviewer may give a list of publications they 'suggest' for the literature review, sometimes completely unrelated fields. If you choose not to, you will likely see your paper rejected.
The truth is that almost all papers published across almost all fields cannot be replicated, full stop. For those that can, the results rarely match up, indicating that the tests are chosen to boost the performance of the method.
If you want to boost citations legitimately, purposefully leak your own paper to get past the publisher pay wall, make it colourful and accessible (if it's too dense they are unlikely to understand it), give examples on how to replicate your method, the abstract is likely the only part that will be read so make it count.
The truth is that almost all papers published across almost all fields cannot be replicated, full stop. For those that can, the results rarely match up, indicating that the tests are chosen to boost the performance of the method.
If you want to boost citations legitimately, purposefully leak your own paper to get past the publisher pay wall, make it colourful and accessible (if it's too dense they are unlikely to understand it), give examples on how to replicate your method, the abstract is likely the only part that will be read so make it count.