A growing number of journals are adopting an 'open data policy' in which authors of research articles are required, during the submission process, to make data availability statement indicating the data associated with a particular manuscript are available in a public repository or somewhere else which can be accessible by anyone. It may include raw or processed dataset used to generate the results presented in the manuscript. No doubt that this policy encourages data reproducibility and helps research to advance but on the other hand, considering that the paper can possibly be rejected or accepted after submission, to what extent this policy carries a risk of theft of valuable research output?? What are your insights on this issue? Please let's discuss.
Don't submit data until after acceptance of your paper
Good question. My views are summarized here (https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/journals/edu/2/1/article-p1.xml). As a new journal we are developing these policies, but within the context of a large publisher, and possibly also influencing them. It will be interesting to read people's views.
ps. Many of these archive location can allow you to limit access to the data via link/password, so that you can share this only with reviewers/editors, and then release the data publicly when accepted or published (or whenever).
The owners of the data have the right to release it or hold it close. In fact often there is an obligation not to share actual data. If publications require this data to be released they will not be able to publish some very good articles.
It seems like a bad policy to me.
Daniel Wright Rick Manner Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman Dear all, thank you for your valuable insights on this issue.
Hi Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman and Rick Manner ,
The author (or their funder or someone) does have the right not to make the data available (with some legal exceptions), and the editor/publisher have the right not to publish the paper. It is a tricky question for the author, and in there are privacy regulations regarding data in most countries. See the attachment in my previous message. Do you disagree with what Miyakawa did? Also, what do you think would have happened with the recent Lancet problems if they had asked for data?
Please look at the attached poster, it is very informative and useful...
Emad Kamil Hussein Thank you for your response. I found it informative.
Dear Daniel Wright ,
I've gone through your article and found it informative. Sensitive data (especially those obtained from experiments involving humans) should carefully be verified for authenticity. I believe that what Miyakawa did was right with this respect. Those who refused to submit their data had their own reasons but they should've complied with the editor's request. Regarding raw data submission, what needs to be done, in my humble opinion, is to limit access of such data to only the editor of the journal and to potential reviewers (if they request). Unfortunately there are some journals that require the authors to make the data public even at the time of submission. This obviously carries a serious risk of theft of scientific data. But if there's an option of limiting access to such data, I personally support the idea of complying with 'open research data policy'.
Mohammed A. Mohammed personally I would never deposit any data or manuscripts in a public repository before the manuscript isn't accepted by a journal.
Dear Frank T. Edelmann , Thank you for expressing your opinion.
'Open data policy' of journals:
At first, the manuscript and supplementary data you submitted to the journal won't be released to public repository before the paper is accepted and confirmed by the author. In fact, I don't believe predator journals and publishers. So, you don't have to be worried about it. But I recommend not to submit supplementary data that contains a portion of the result you are planning to publish as a separate paper in the future. Otherwise, Open Access policy is upcoming changes in many advanced journals and it is the great news for scientists to have updates with no expense. It's good point of discussion, anyways.
Jemal Tola Horo Thanks for giving your insight about the issue. Of course this policy supports the very idea of data transparency and reproducibility which has a merit from scientific excellence point of view. I believe it would be more safer if journals allow researchers to make their data available right after the acceptance of their manuscript instead of requesting them during submission. That way this policy could achieve its anticipated goals.
- Badges
- Science topic