Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Looking into Pandora’s Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage

View ORCID ProfileBastian Greshake
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/124495
Bastian Greshake
1Institute of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Bastian Greshake
  • For correspondence: bgreshake@googlemail.com
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Despite the growth of Open Access, illegally circumventing paywalls to access scholarly publications is becoming a more mainstream phenomenon. The web service Sci-Hub is amongst the biggest facilitators of this, offering free access to around 62 million publications. So far it is not well studied how and why its users are accessing publications through Sci-Hub. By utilizing the recently released corpus of Sci-Hub and comparing it to the data of ˜28 million downloads done through the service, this study tries to address some of these questions. The comparative analysis shows that both the usage and complete corpus is largely made up of recently published articles, with users disproportionately favoring newer articles and 35% of downloaded articles being published after 2013. These results hint that embargo periods before publications become Open Access are frequently circumnavigated using Guerilla Open Access approaches like Sci-Hub. On a journal level, the downloads show a bias towards some scholarly disciplines, especially Chemistry, suggesting increased barriers to access for these. Comparing the use and corpus on a publisher level, it becomes clear that only 11% of publishers are highly requested in comparison to the baseline frequency, while 45% of all publishers are significantly less accessed than expected. Despite this, the oligopoly of publishers is even more remarkable on the level of content consumption, with 80% of all downloads being published through only 9 publishers. All of this suggests that Sci-Hub is used by different populations and for a number of different reasons and that there is still a lack of access to the published scientific record. A further analysis of these openly available data resources will undoubtedly be valuable for the investigation of academic publishing.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted April 08, 2017.
Download PDF
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Looking into Pandora’s Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Looking into Pandora’s Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage
Bastian Greshake
bioRxiv 124495; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/124495
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Looking into Pandora’s Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage
Bastian Greshake
bioRxiv 124495; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/124495

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Scientific Communication and Education
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (3691)
  • Biochemistry (7800)
  • Bioengineering (5678)
  • Bioinformatics (21295)
  • Biophysics (10584)
  • Cancer Biology (8179)
  • Cell Biology (11948)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (6764)
  • Ecology (10401)
  • Epidemiology (2065)
  • Evolutionary Biology (13875)
  • Genetics (9709)
  • Genomics (13075)
  • Immunology (8151)
  • Microbiology (20022)
  • Molecular Biology (7859)
  • Neuroscience (43073)
  • Paleontology (321)
  • Pathology (1279)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2261)
  • Physiology (3353)
  • Plant Biology (7232)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1314)
  • Synthetic Biology (2008)
  • Systems Biology (5539)
  • Zoology (1128)