How Is Sci-Hub Affecting Academic Publishing?

In 2011, Alexandra Elbakyan, a graduate student in Kazakhstan, started a website known as Sci-Hub. Since its inception, the site has gained an increasing amount of attention. In fact, from September 2015 to February 2016 over 28 million scientific papers were downloaded from Sci-Hub by many researchers worldwide. The downloaded articles were from major renowned journals like Nature and Science and also from smaller journals in specialized fields of science. Sci-Hub basically provides free access to over 50 million articles, and researchers can simply search by using the title of a paper or the DOI to gain immediate, free access thus making it an easy to use search engine for finding academic papers. Overall, the idea of free access to journal articles may seem like a great advantage for researchers all over the world, but in order to truly understand how Sci-Hub is turning the academic publishing world upside down we have to understand how publishing and access to journals is traditionally done.

Publishing Process and Journal Access

There are essentially two avenues of publishing and accessing journals. In the first, researchers write and submit their manuscripts to a journal that then publishes the paper without a fee, but in order for other researchers to access the paper they must pay a fee. The second avenue is when a researcher writes and submits their manuscript and also pays a publishing fee thus, making their article open access so that other researchers do not have to pay to read the article. For the most part, researchers at major universities do not really notice a difference either way when it comes to access because most libraries at these universities pay to subscribe to the journals in order to provide access for their academic researchers. On the other hand, researchers from smaller less funded universities often lack such access because it just not affordable.

Effects of Sci-Hub

Sci-Hub is creating havoc for both these avenues of publishing, as the type of open access created by Sci-Hub is basically considered piracy and therefore, is illegal. From the perspective of the first avenue, large academic journal publishers are against Sci-Hub because these publishers rely on their subscription services to generate revenue. If researchers can gain access to journals for free then why should academic organizations pay to get access to journal articles? This has led publishers to claim that Sci-Hub is seriously damaging the academic publishing world. From the perspective of the second avenue, researchers can pay around $2000 in publishing fees for an open access article and with Sci-Hub offering open access for all articles, researchers might be less inclined to pay these fees and might rather opt for publishing via the first avenue. This kind of thinking should be a part of research ethics considering its legality. Although researchers have accepted these two avenues for many years, there has always been an underlying frustration among researchers that paying such ridiculous costs and having a paywall for information they submitted and reviewed for free is simply too much to pay.

Sci-Hub is now facing a lawsuit for piracy. However, Elbakyan is motivated to push through this lawsuit. She is not aiming to be an activist, but is actually trying to get the academic publishing industry to change. Her goal is to make academic research freely available to anyone and this revolves around the notion of open access. In general, open access articles end up getting more citations than paid articles, which makes sense because researchers must be able to read the article in order to cite it, and since open access articles are available to all researchers they are going to be cited more frequently. Researchers desire access to articles and some publishers provide this access for a fee. However, Sci-Hub removes the need for all these types of fees.

Moving Forward

Interestingly, fees for journal access have grown increasingly high and it is becoming more and more common for researchers to be unable to access even their own published work, as even the wealthier universities are unable to pay these rising fees. Because of this, we see changes arising as researchers are beginning to fight back against the problems caused by closed-access publishers. This is the main reason many researchers are turning to Sci-Hub, and in spite of the growing legal pressure that it faces, Elbakyan continues to push forward. Sci-Hub seems to be here to stay, and although the actions behind Sci-Hub are clearly meant to provide everyone with free access to academic research, the approach taken is wrong and unethical.

Rate this article

Rating*

Your email address will not be published.

You might also like
X

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

  • 2000+ blog articles
  • 50+ Webinars
  • 10+ Expert podcasts
  • 50+ Infographics
  • Q&A Forum
  • 10+ eBooks
  • 10+ Checklists
  • Research Guides
[contact-form-7 id="40123" title="Global popup two"]





    Researchers' Poll

    What features do you prefer in a plagiarism detector? (Select all that apply)