Are there any de facto standards when publishing, or is there substantial latitude in deriving one's own methodology?
I understand in practice, even the St. Louis Fed is gently skeptical of the validity of most technical methods, but I was wondering how academia viewed them.
While Dooley and Shafer (1976, 1984) were largely dismissed, Neely and Weller (1999) seemed to fare fairly well using genetic algorithms, and Markov and ARIMA methods are reviewed more or less favorably in terms of predictive value.
Is accuracy of prediction (and consequently profitability) even necessarily a factor in modelling for academia, or is the simplicity and explanatory value more heavily favored?$^1$
$^1$*Note: Not sure if this merits a separate question, or can be answered as an elaboration of the primary*