The Sci-Hub Effect: Sci-Hub downloads lead to more article citations
Maybe I misunderstood something, but it seems to me their data demonstrate that less interesting papers that nobody bothered to download from SciHub tend to have fewer citations than more interesting ones that are downloaded? How does that support the conclusion “Sci-Hub downloads <i>lead to</i> more article citations” (emphasis mine)?<p>(Yes I read the paper and I’ve seen all the other factors they considered, but those factors simply aren’t as good predictors/indicators of interest as an organic download number from <i>any channel</i>, whether it’s ScienceDirect or SciHub.)<p>Edit: To be clear, papers in their supposedly "limited access" (if we want to draw the same conclusion) control group appear to be available on Sci-Hub, i.e. as open access as their Sci-Hub group. Details in this comment: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23710992" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23710992</a>