I've found in my recent studies and reflections on complexity some of the roots of this distrust. A lot of this disciplines end up "chasing the tail" of very chaotic phenomena, and thus present data far along a nonlinear process. Given also academia's siloed character and the modern artistry of statistics and it's no wonder these papers don't pass the smell test.
Regarding complexity, I've just finished the book Worlds Hidden in Plain Sight, which I highly recommend to the curious. It's a collection of essays stemming out of the Sante Fe institute, which has been taking a trans-disciplinary approach to some of the things you've mentioned (namely economics and social sciences) and challenged the reductionist scientific viewpoints around them. The SFI seems to prioritize having their publications somewhat available to the general public, and the book can be had for a mere $11. Not that I aim to market them, but I think academic publishing could be a lot better in this respect for the lay reader. The economics of the market lay broken wherein the typical buyer is a debt-money bloated university that cares little about book prices.