Direct comparison
Data-Sharing Policy: 4 Publishers Compared
Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley & MDPI data policies compared: DAS mandates, tier systems, repository rules, and exceptions.
Side-by-side comparison
| Dimension | Elsevier | Springer Nature | Wiley | MDPI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Is a Data Availability Statement (DAS) required? | Set per journal via that title's Guide for Authors; most Elsevier journals require a DAS as part of one of the Research Data options described below. | Yes -- "All original articles must include a data availability statement," though rollout across the full portfolio is being completed in stages. | Yes -- required on all research- and synthesis-based articles, regardless of which policy tier the journal applies and regardless of whether any data is actually shared. | Yes -- required on every published article across MDPI journals, including when no new data were generated or when data cannot be shared. |
| Policy structure | Multiple named "Research Data" options (e.g. Option A: encourage deposit and citation; Option B: encourage deposit, citation and linking, sometimes with reviewer access to the dataset) applied per journal rather than one universal statement. | A public four-tier taxonomy (Type 1-4) assigned per journal. | A public four-tier taxonomy assigned per journal: Encourages Data Sharing, Expects Data Sharing, Mandates Data Sharing, and Mandates Data Sharing and Peer Review of Data. | One baseline policy applied across the portfolio rather than a lettered/numbered tier system, informed by the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines. |
| Tier/option definitions | Option A: deposit and citation of data encouraged. Option B: deposit, citation and linking encouraged, with a DAS; some options add reviewer access to the underlying data. Additional lettered options exist; the applicable one is specified in each journal's Guide for Authors. | Type 1: data sharing and citation encouraged. Type 2: data sharing and evidence of sharing encouraged. Type 3: data sharing encouraged and a DAS required. Type 4: data sharing, evidence of sharing, and peer review of the data all required. | Encourages Data Sharing: DAS confirms presence/absence of data, sharing optional. Expects Data Sharing: DAS describes availability or explains absence, sharing expected. Mandates Data Sharing: DAS describes availability, sharing required. Mandates Data Sharing and Peer Review of Data: as above, plus the data itself is peer reviewed. | Single policy: a DAS describing where supporting data can be found (or why it cannot be shared) is required on every article; no separate named tiers. |
| Is public repository deposit mandatory? | Not centrally mandated -- "there are no restrictions concerning the choice of a database; authors can use whatever database they want," though a citable, permanent link is expected once data is shared. | Public deposit is "strongly encouraged" portfolio-wide, and separately mandatory for specific community-endorsed data types (e.g. certain sequence or structural data), which must go into designated field-specific repositories. | No single company-wide repository is mandated; whether deposit/sharing is required depends on the journal's assigned tier, from optional at "Encourages" up to required at the "Mandates" tiers. | Deposit in a trusted repository is recommended, not strictly mandatory -- if not possible, the reason must be stated in the DAS and the material made available to interested researchers on request. |
| Does the underlying data get peer reviewed? | On some journals, under Research Data options that specifically invite reviewers to assess the dataset alongside the manuscript. | Only at the top tier, Type 4. | Only at the top tier, "Mandates Data Sharing and Peer Review of Data." | Not part of MDPI's baseline data-availability policy. |
| Uniform across the whole journal portfolio? | No -- the applicable Research Data option is set journal-by-journal; check that journal's own Guide for Authors. | No -- tier assignment varies by journal, and portfolio-wide rollout of the policy is explicitly described as staged, not complete. | No -- tier assignment is set per journal. | Largely yes for the baseline DAS requirement itself, though individual journals publish their own Instructions for Authors with subject-specific data-reporting guidance layered on top. |
| What happens if data genuinely can't be shared? | Not detailed as a single uniform mechanism in Elsevier's general policy overview; handled at journal level. | Explicitly addressed: where public sharing isn't possible (e.g. participant privacy), the DAS must still describe the data's status and any access conditions rather than be omitted. | Not itemised beyond the tier system in Wiley's public overview; specific allowances are set at journal level. | Explicitly addressed: authors must state the reason in the DAS (e.g. privacy or ethical restriction) and make the material available to interested researchers on request. |
| Named external framework referenced | Mendeley Data referenced as one storage/preservation option, not a named compliance framework. | No single external framework named on the general policy overview reviewed. | No single external framework named on the general policy overview reviewed. | Explicitly states its data policies are informed by the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines. |
| Where to confirm the exact rule for a specific journal | That journal's own "Guide for Authors" page. | That journal's own submission guidelines (linked from the journal homepage). | That journal's own author guidelines page. | That journal's own "Instructions for Authors" page. |
Common questions
FAQ
Do all four publishers require a Data Availability Statement?+
Yes, on the article types each covers -- but the mechanism differs. Wiley and MDPI require a DAS regardless of whether data is actually shared or exists; Springer Nature requires one on all original articles as its portfolio-wide rollout completes; Elsevier requires one as part of whichever Research Data option a given journal applies. In every case, the safest approach is to check the specific journal's own author guidelines rather than assume the publisher-level policy applies verbatim.
Which publisher has the strictest data-sharing policy?+
None of the four mandates public repository deposit as a blanket, portfolio-wide rule. The strictest individual option at each publisher is the tier or option that adds peer review of the dataset itself -- Springer Nature's Type 4, Wiley's "Mandates Data Sharing and Peer Review of Data," and some Elsevier Research Data options -- but these are assigned to specific journals, not applied company-wide. MDPI's baseline requirement (a DAS on every article, deposit recommended) is more uniform but does not, on its own, mandate deposit.
Does a publisher's data-sharing policy override my funder's data-sharing mandate?+
No -- the two operate independently and researchers generally have to satisfy both. A funder's data-management or data-sharing policy (for example, an NIH Data Management and Sharing Plan or an NSF requirement) governs how a specific award's data must be managed and shared, while the publisher's policy governs what a manuscript submitted to a specific journal must state or provide. See the companion guide to funder and institutional data-sharing requirements for that side of the comparison.
Going deeper
