fbpx
September 21, 2020
North Carolina State University Researchers Bust this Robocall Myth

Does Answering One Robocall Lead to Being Bombarded with Tons More Spam Calls? Researchers have Found the Answer

A perpetual robocall myth has now been debunked by researchers at North Carolina State University after an extensive study…

There’s a common narrative about robocalls. That answering just one single spam call will lead to many more, multiplied substantially. Turns out, it is actually to do with personal perception rather than reality. This, according to researchers at North Carolina State University who dug deep into the practice. But, the researchers also found there is at least a modicum of truth to the so-called “robocall storm.”

North Carolina State University Researchers Bust this Robocall Myth

The study included an immense 66,606 fake phone lines and 1,481,201 pre-recorded unsolicited calls, placed over 11 months. After running the experiment, the team discovered that numbers which answered the automated calls were not more likely to receive lots and lots more. Instead, there wasn’t enough to substantiate the myth that answering one would lead to many others.

However, it appears some of those anecdotal tales of people being inundated with so many robocalls from unknown numbers that it rendered their phones practically unusable are true. Researches found that when spam callers disguised their origins with spoofed numbers and make makes hundreds of thousands of calls, many of the recipients would actually phone back.

The good news is the research team also found that by grouping robocalls into clusters, they were able to identify 2,687 specific campaigns. Meaning, it’s possible to trace robocall numbers back, which will help federal regulators, telecoms, and app developers significantly reduce the nuisance.

Owen E. Richason IV

Covers social media, apps, search and like news. History buff, movie and theme park lover. Blessed dad and husband. Owen is also a musician and is the founder of Groove Modes.          

View all posts by Owen E. Richason IV →