I think it's a fair criticism but I think even with quantitative data, the analysis of the REASONS behind this data can be subject to researcher bias without the input of the qualitative or humanistic input from the data set/ sample. Otherwise trends and analysis may become subjective to the researchers' input/ knowledge.

I suppose it becomes a dataset based on how you use it. It is essentially a source of material culture which for an anthropologist or archaeologist may become a part of the dataset but for the family member while they may also consider it material culture they may not consider it a dataset.

This makes me consider the value of Qualitative methods of research compared to quantitative, just using other words to identify the validity or data and source material. Both are valid, but their techniques of analysis are rooted in different methods of understanding.