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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grey, Andrew, Bolland, Mark J, Dalbeth, Nicola, Gamble, Greg, Sadler, Lynn
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