Cargando…
We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations
Objectives To assess the amount, relevance, content, and suppressibility of academic electronic spam invitations to attend conferences or submit manuscripts. Design Prospective cohort study. Setting Email accounts of participating academics. Participants Five intrepid academics and a great many publ...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5156609/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27974354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i5383 |
_version_ | 1782481290576003072 |
---|---|
author | Grey, Andrew Bolland, Mark J Dalbeth, Nicola Gamble, Greg Sadler, Lynn |
author_facet | Grey, Andrew Bolland, Mark J Dalbeth, Nicola Gamble, Greg Sadler, Lynn |
author_sort | Grey, Andrew |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objectives To assess the amount, relevance, content, and suppressibility of academic electronic spam invitations to attend conferences or submit manuscripts. Design Prospective cohort study. Setting Email accounts of participating academics. Participants Five intrepid academics and a great many publishers, editors, and conference organisers. Intervention Unsubscribing from sender’s distribution lists. Main outcome measures Number of spam invitations received before, immediately after, and one year after unsubscribing from senders’ distribution lists. The proportion of duplicate invitations was also assessed and the relevance of each invitation graded to the recipient’s research interests. A qualitative assessment of the content of spam invitations was conducted. Results At baseline, recipients received an average of 312 spam invitations each month. Unsubscribing reduced the frequency of the invitations by 39% after one month but by only 19% after one year. Overall, 16% of spam invitations were duplicates and 83% had little or no relevance to the recipients’ research interests. Spam invitations were characterised by inventive language, flattery, and exuberance, and they were sometimes baffling and amusing. Conclusions Academic spam is common, repetitive, often irrelevant, and difficult to avoid or prevent. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5156609 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51566092016-12-15 We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations Grey, Andrew Bolland, Mark J Dalbeth, Nicola Gamble, Greg Sadler, Lynn BMJ Research Objectives To assess the amount, relevance, content, and suppressibility of academic electronic spam invitations to attend conferences or submit manuscripts. Design Prospective cohort study. Setting Email accounts of participating academics. Participants Five intrepid academics and a great many publishers, editors, and conference organisers. Intervention Unsubscribing from sender’s distribution lists. Main outcome measures Number of spam invitations received before, immediately after, and one year after unsubscribing from senders’ distribution lists. The proportion of duplicate invitations was also assessed and the relevance of each invitation graded to the recipient’s research interests. A qualitative assessment of the content of spam invitations was conducted. Results At baseline, recipients received an average of 312 spam invitations each month. Unsubscribing reduced the frequency of the invitations by 39% after one month but by only 19% after one year. Overall, 16% of spam invitations were duplicates and 83% had little or no relevance to the recipients’ research interests. Spam invitations were characterised by inventive language, flattery, and exuberance, and they were sometimes baffling and amusing. Conclusions Academic spam is common, repetitive, often irrelevant, and difficult to avoid or prevent. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. 2016-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5156609/ /pubmed/27974354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i5383 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. |
spellingShingle | Research Grey, Andrew Bolland, Mark J Dalbeth, Nicola Gamble, Greg Sadler, Lynn We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations |
title | We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations |
title_full | We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations |
title_fullStr | We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations |
title_full_unstemmed | We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations |
title_short | We read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations |
title_sort | we read spam a lot: prospective cohort study of unsolicited and unwanted academic invitations |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5156609/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27974354 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i5383 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT greyandrew wereadspamalotprospectivecohortstudyofunsolicitedandunwantedacademicinvitations AT bollandmarkj wereadspamalotprospectivecohortstudyofunsolicitedandunwantedacademicinvitations AT dalbethnicola wereadspamalotprospectivecohortstudyofunsolicitedandunwantedacademicinvitations AT gamblegreg wereadspamalotprospectivecohortstudyofunsolicitedandunwantedacademicinvitations AT sadlerlynn wereadspamalotprospectivecohortstudyofunsolicitedandunwantedacademicinvitations |