Recent work led by the Center for Open Science (COS) found that papers published in journals with strong data and code sharing policies were more readily reproducible. COS has long advocated for policies that increase the openness of research through our Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines, which were recently updated in 2025 with leadership from TOP Advisory Board Chair Sean Grant (University of Oregon). The Guidelines are designed to support policymakers in publishing, funding, and research-performing institutions in developing policies that increase the verifiability of empirical research claims. Today, we are pleased to release more specific guidance for journals and publishers wishing to update their processes and policies to better align with TOP 2025.
TOP 2025 now includes new research practices such as Protocol Transparency and a more consistent framework where each policy aligns with a clear directive to authors to Disclose, Share & Cite, or Certify that research practices were conducted according to discipline-specific best practices. These changes resulted from a two year period of discussion and refinement, where TOP’s main goal was used to direct these revisions: TOP is a policy framework whose purpose is to increase the verifiability of empirical research claims.
Author instructions provide the most explicit guidance on how journals implement and enforce their editorial policies. TOP 2025 represents an opportunity for journals that have used TOP in the past to consider ways that they can better align their expectations with the newest open science standards. And TOP 2025 also presents an opportunity for those who have not yet used TOP to consider what it has to offer for their policies and for the research that they publish.
TOP 2025 Research Practices and the Research Lifecycle
The first main section of TOP 2025 includes seven Research Practices: Study Registration, Protocol Transparency, Analysis Plan Transparency, Materials Transparency, Analytic Code Transparency, Data Transparency, and Reporting Transparency. These seven sections correspond with outputs that can be created during key phases of the research lifecycle: from planning to dissemination.
While not every practice will be conducted in every study, TOP’s modular structure allows researchers and policymakers to use those standards that are most relevant to the methods appropriate for their scholarship. For example, creating an analysis plan before a study is conducted may be important if the researcher is testing pre-specified hypotheses, but may not be relevant if setting out on unplanned research is the goal of the upcoming work.
How Journals Can Implement TOP 2025
These seven Research Practices each have a distinct policy that could be implemented by the journal.
Disclosure
The first policy is a Disclosure requirement, where the authors simply state whether or not the output is available. If so, clear instructions are provided for the authors so that they know what and how it should be shared. These instructions are the same even for journals using the higher levels, where transparency by posting in a repository is actually required. That next level is Share & Cite.
Share & Cite
The phrase “Share and Cite” is designed to emphasize what is expected of authors: they must share the output, and cite it so that it is clear when it was generated, who created it, and where it is available. The Share & Cite level is relevant for authors who created the items themselves, and for authors who are re-using items that other scientists created. For example, if the study requires the use of an existing dataset, the Share & Cite instructions are identical: the authors must provide a citation of where the data was obtained. Creating the Share & Cite level clarifies what is expected for both new and existing research outputs.
Certify
Finally, the third way to implement one of the seven Research Practices policies is to Certify that it was conducted according to a discipline-specific best practice. New for TOP 2025, this level leaves more room for journals to define the best practice that is relevant for their research community. COS can point to specific criteria for what it means to share a dataset or to preregister a study (link to badges), but that does not mean that those are the only standards that a policymaker could use to certify that a Research Practice was conducted according to a specific standard.
We look forward to pointing out more examples of other organizations using discipline-specific best practices, which demonstrate the flexible ways that the TOP conceptual framework can be applied across the scientific community.
What’s Next
In the coming months, there will be many more resources made available. COS will host a webinar on how journals have implemented TOP-specific policies. The TOP Advisory Board is working to provide more specific guidance for how funders can implement TOP practices, and is using recent work in University and Institutional policies to make specific recommendations for improving research and researcher assessment. Finally, COS will be continuing to release its own implementation of TOP in areas where it funds and conducts research.