Despite the advance of the Open Access (OA) movement, most scholarly production can only be accessed through a paywall. We conduct an international survey among researchers (N=3,304) to measure the willingness and motivations to use (or not use) scholarly piracy sites, and other alternatives to overcome a paywall such as paying with their own money, institutional loans, just reading the abstract, asking the corresponding author for a copy of the document, asking a colleague to get the document for them, or searching for an OA version of the paper. We also explore differences in terms of age, professional position, country income level, discipline, and commitment to OA. The results show that researchers most frequently look for OA versions of the documents. However, more than 50% of the participants have used a scholarly piracy site at least once. This is less common in high-income countries, and among older and better-established scholars. Regarding disciplines, such services were less used in Life & Health Sciences and Social Sciences. Those who have never used a pirate library highlighted ethical and legal objections or pointed out that they were not aware of the existence of such libraries.
翻译:尽管开放存取(OA)运动取得了进展,但大多数学术作品只能通过付费墙获得。我们对研究人员进行了国际调查(N=3,304),以衡量使用(或不使用)学术盗版网站的意愿和动机,以及克服付费墙的其他替代方法,如用自己的钱支付、机构贷款、阅读摘要、要求相应作者提供文件副本、请同事为他们获取文件或寻找OA版本的文件。我们还探讨了年龄、专业地位、国家收入水平、纪律和对OA的承诺等方面的差异。结果显示,研究人员最经常地寻找OA文件的版本。然而,超过50%的参与者至少曾经使用过一个学术盗版。这在高收入国家以及年龄较大和成绩较好的学者中并不常见。在学科方面,这类服务在生命和健康科学及社会科学中使用较少。那些从未使用海盗图书馆的人强调道德和法律上的反对意见,或者指出他们不知道这些图书馆的存在。