Ethics and Information Technology

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 153–163 | Cite as

A bibliometric analysis of privacy and ethics in IEEE Security and Privacy

  • Jonathan Tse
  • Dawn E. Schrader
  • Dipayan Ghosh
  • Tony Liao
  • David Lundie
Original Paper


The increasingly ubiquitous use of technology has led to the concomitant rise of intensified data collection and the ethical issues associated with the privacy and security of that data. In order to address the question of how these ethical concerns are discussed in the literature surrounding the subject, we examined articles published in IEEE Security and Privacy, a magazine targeted towards a general, technically-oriented readership spanning both academia and industry. Our investigation of the intersection between the ethical and technological dimensions of privacy and security is structured as a bibliometric analysis. Our dataset covers all articles published in IEEE Security and Privacy since its inception in 2003 to February 06, 2014 . This venue was chosen not only because of its target readership, but also because a preliminary search of keywords related to ethics, privacy, and security topics in the ISI Web of Knowledge and IEEE Xplore indicated that IEEE Security and Privacy has published a preponderance of articles matching those topics. In fact, our search returned two-fold more articles for IEEE Security and Privacy than the next most prolific venue. These reasons, coupled with the fact that both academia and industry are well-represented in the authorship of articles makes IEEE Security and Privacy an excellent candidate for bibliometric analysis. Our analysis examines the ways articles in IEEE Security and Privacy relate ethics to information technology. Such articles can influence the development of law, policy and the future of information technology ethics. We employed thematic and JK-biplot analyses of content relating privacy and ethics and found eight dominant themes as well as the inter-theme relationships. Authors and institutional affiliations were examined to discern whether centers of research activity and/or authors dominated the overall field or thematic areas. Results suggest avenues for future work in critical areas, especially for closing present gaps in the coverage of ethics and information technology privacy and security themes particularly in the areas of ethics and privacy awareness.


Ethics Privacy Education 



The authors would like to acknowledge Person 1, Person 2, and Person 3 of Institution for their invaluable contributions. This research was funded by a grant and there are no conflicts of interest by any author or consultant to this project.


  1. Acquisti, A. (2014) From the economics of privacy to the economics of big data. Privacy, big data, and the public good: Frameworks for engagementGoogle Scholar
  2. Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2005). Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security and Privacy, 3(1), 23–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acquisti, A., John, L.K., & Loewenstein, G. (2013). What is privacy worth? The Journal of Legal Studies 42(2), 249–274. doi:  10.1086/671754
  4. Allen, A. (2007). The virtuous spy: privacy as an ethical limit. Scholarship at Penn Law.Google Scholar
  5. Azevedo, P. G., Mesquita, F. O., & Young, R. J. (2010). Fishing for gaps in science: A bibliographic analysis of Brazilian freshwater ichthyology from 1986 to 2005. Journal of Fish Biology, 76(9), 2177–2193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beel, J., & Gipp, B. (2010). Academic Search Engine Spam and Google Scholar’s Resilience Against it. Journal of electronic publishing.Google Scholar
  7. Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication and Society, 15(5), 662–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen, J.E. (2013). What privacy is for. Harvard Law Review 126.Google Scholar
  9. Diebold, F. X. (2003). Advances in economics and econometrics: Theory and applications, econometric society monographs. Eighth world congress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Gauch, H, Jr. (1993). Prediction. Parsimony and Noise. American scientist, 81(5), 468–478.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Ghosh, D.P., Schrader, D.E., Schulze, W.D., Wicker, S.B. (2012). Economic analysis of privacy-aware advanced metering infrastructure adoption. Innovative Smart Grid Technologies (ISGT), 2012 IEEE PES pp 1–4Google Scholar
  12. Gurses, S., & Diaz, C. (2013). Two tales of privacy in online social networks. Security and Privacy, IEEE, 11(3), 29–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gurses, S., Troncoso, C. & Diaz, C. (2011). Engineering privacy by design …Privacy & Data Protection.Google Scholar
  14. Hadnagy, C., & Wilson, P. (2010). Social engineering: The art of human hacking (1st ed.). Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Hugl, U. (2010). Approaching the value of Privacy: Review of theoretical privacy concepts and aspects of privacy management. AMCIS.Google Scholar
  16. Hull, G., Lipford, H.R., Latulipe, C. (2011). Contextual gaps: privacy issues on Facebook. Ethics Inf Technol.Google Scholar
  17. Jackson, K., & Trochim, W. (2002). Concept mapping as an alternative approach for the analysis of open-ended survey responses. Organizational Research Methods, 5(4), 307–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Knobel, C., & Bowker, G. C. (2011). Values in design. CACM.Google Scholar
  19. Lessig, L. (2006). Code. Lawrence Lessig.Google Scholar
  20. Lindsey, D. (1980). Production and citation measures in the sociology of science: The problem of multiple authorship. Social Studies of Science, 10(2), 145–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Martin, K. (2012). Information technology and privacy: Conceptual muddles or privacy vacuums? Ethics and Information Technology, 14(4), 267–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pearson, K. (1900). X. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to.... The LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Pham, M. C., Klamma, R., & Jarke, M. (2011). Development of computer science disciplines: A social network analysis approach. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 1(4), 321–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Richards, N. M., & King, J. H. (2014). Big Data Ethics. Wake Forest Law Review.Google Scholar
  25. Sar, R. K., & Al-Saggaf, Y. (2014). Contextual integrity’s decision heuristic and the tracking by social network sites. Ethics Information Technology, 16, 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schrader, D., Ghosh, D.P., Schulze, W.D., & Wicker, S.B. (2013). Civilization and Its Privacy Discontents. In: Patterson H (ed) Privacy Law Scholars Conference, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  27. Shilton, K. (2010). Participatory sensing: Building empowering surveillance: EBSCOhost. Surveillance & Society, 8, 131–150.Google Scholar
  28. Solove, D. J. (2007). The future of reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and privacy on the internet. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Stajano, F., & Wilson, P. (2009). Understanding scam victims: Seven principles for systems security. Technical Report UCAM-CL-TR-754, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
  30. Stark, L., & Tierney, M. (2013). Lockbox: Mobility, privacy and values in cloud storage. Ethics and Information Technology, 16(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Torres-Salinas, D., Robinson-Garcia, N., Jiménez-Contreras, E., Herrera, F., & López-Cózar, E.D. (2013). On the use of Biplot analysis for multivariate bibliometric and scientific indicators. arXiv.1302.0608v1.
  32. Toubiana, V., Narayanan, A., Boneh, D., & Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Adnostic: Privacy preserving targeted advertising. NDSS.Google Scholar
  33. Toubiana, V., Subramanian, L., & Nissenbaum, H. (2011). TrackMeNot: Enhancing the privacy of Web Search. arXiv 1109.4677v1
  34. Turow, J. (2012). The daily you: How the new advertising industry is defining your identity and your worth. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  36. Wicker, S. B., & Schrader, D. E. (2011). Privacy-aware design principles for information networks. Proceedings IEEE, 99(2), 330–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Tse
    • 1
  • Dawn E. Schrader
    • 1
  • Dipayan Ghosh
    • 1
  • Tony Liao
    • 3
  • David Lundie
    • 2
  1. 1.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Liverpool Hope UniversityLiverpoolUK
  3. 3.Media Studies and ProductionTemple UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations