The propensity in research in the last 20 years, especially in cognitive science and cognitive neuroscience, has been to design a study with no attempt to operationalize terminology, so that it is impossible to replicate the study since there is no definitive expected outcome nor any rationale by which to tie any outcome to a specific theory, hypothesis or proposition, and, consequently, no real control for random variables; hence a result that proves nothing and a study with absolutely no meaning or validity whatsoever despite whatever claims are made for the study. The fundamental tenet for valid scientific evaluation is replicability. In this paper we explore the question of reliability and integrity of research in the field of psychology, the field of neuroscience, and in the broad arena of science itself.