The disclosure of private data: measuring the privacy paradox in digital services
- 683 Downloads
Privacy is a current topic in the context of digital services because such services demand mass volumes of consumer data. Although most consumers are aware of their personal privacy, they frequently do not behave rationally in terms of the risk-benefit trade-off. This phenomenon is known as the privacy paradox. It is a common limitation in research papers examining consumers’ privacy intentions. Using a design science approach, we develop a metric that determines the extent of consumers’ privacy paradox in digital services based on the theoretical construct of the privacy calculus. We demonstrate a practical application of the metric for mobile apps. With that, we contribute to validating respective research findings. Moreover, among others, consumers and companies can be prevented from unwanted consequences regarding data privacy issues and service market places can provide privacy-customized suggestions.
KeywordsPrivacy paradox Privacy calculus Metric Digital services
- Acquisti, A. (2004). Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate gratification. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (pp. 21–29). https://doi.org/10.1145/988772.988777.
- Becker, M., Lehrig, S., & Becker, S. (2015). Systematically deriving quality metrics for cloud computing systems. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering (pp. 169–174). New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2668930.2688043.
- Böhme, R., & Freiling, F. C. (2008). On metrics and measurements. In I. Eusgeld (Ed.), Lecture notes in computer science: Vol. 4909. Dependability metrics. Advanced lectures (pp. 7–13). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Bouwers, E., van Deursen, A., & Visser, J. (2013). Evaluating usefulness of software metrics: An industrial experience report. Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 921–930).Google Scholar
- Buck, C., Horbel, C., Germelmann, C. C., & Eymann, T. (2014). The unconscious app consumer. Proceedings of the 22nd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2014), Tel Aviv, June 9–11, 2014.Google Scholar
- Cunningham, S. M. (1967). The major dimensions of perceived risk. In D. F. Cox (Ed.), Risk taking and information handling in consumer behavior (pp. 82–111). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Degirmenci, K., Guhr, N., & Breitner, M. (2013). Mobile applications and access to personal information: a discussion of users’ privacy concerns. Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2013), Milan, December 15–18, 2013.Google Scholar
- Erl, T., Puttini, R., & Mahmood, Z. (2013). Cloud computing: concepts, technology and architecture. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Felt, A. P., Ha, E., Egelman, S., Haney, A., Chin, E., & Wagner, D. (2012). Android permissions: user attention, comprehension, and behavior. Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2012), Washington, DC, July 11–13, 2012.Google Scholar
- Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
- Graupner, E., Melcher, F., Demers, D., & Maedche, A. (2015). Customers’ intention to use digital services in retail banking: an information processing perspective. Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2015), Münster, May 26–29, 2015.Google Scholar
- Hauff, S., Veit, D., & Tuunainen, V. (2015). Towards a taxonomy of perceived consequences of privacy-invasive practices. Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2015), Münster, May 26–29, 2015.Google Scholar
- Hawkey, K., & Inkpen, K. M. (2006). Keeping up appearances: Understanding the dimensions of incidental information privacy. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124893.
- Horbach, M., & Horbach, M. (Eds.). (2013). Informatik 2013: Informatik angepasst an Mensch, Organisation und Umwelt. Koblenz: Bonner Köllen Verlag.Google Scholar
- Kaiser, M., Klier, M., & Heinrich, B. (2007). How to measure data quality? A metric-based approach. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2007), Montreal, December 9–12, 2007.Google Scholar
- Keith, M. J., Thompson, S. C., Hale, J., & Greer, C. (2012). Examining the rationality of information disclosure through mobile devices. Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2012), Orlando, December 16–19, 2012.Google Scholar
- Keith, M. J., Babb, J. S., & Lowry, P. B. (2014). A longitudinal study of information privacy on mobile devices. In Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3149–3158).Google Scholar
- Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. M. (2010). Principles of marketing. Upper Saddle River, NY: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Krasnova, H., & Veltri, N. F. (2010). Privacy calculus on social networking sites: explorative evidence from Germany and USA. Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2010), January 5–8, 2010.Google Scholar
- Kumaraguru, P., & Cranor, L. F. (2005). Privacy indexes: A survey of Westin’s studies. Technical Report, CMUISRI-05-138, Carnegie Mellon University, Institute of Software Research.Google Scholar
- Lynne, M. M., & Mentzer, K. (2014). Foresight for a responsible future with ICT. Information Systems Frontiers, 16.Google Scholar
- Merriam Webster. (2017). Definition of metric. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metric.
- Offermann, P., Blom, S., Schönherr, M., & Bub, U. (2010). Artifact types in information systems design science – a literature review. In D. Hutchison, T. Kanade, J. Kittler, J. M. Kleinberg, F. Mattern, J. C. Mitchell,. ... S. Aier (Eds.), Global perspectives on design science research (pp. 77–92). Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13335-0_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schreiner, M., & Hess, T. (2015). Why are consumers willing to pay for privacy? An application of the privacy-freemium model to media companies. Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2015), Münster, May 26–29, 2015.Google Scholar
- Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., & Berendt, B. (2001). E-privacy in 2nd generation e-commerce: privacy preferences versus actual behavior. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce.Google Scholar
- Tene, O., & Polonetsky, J. (2012). Privacy in the age of big data: a time for big decisions. Stanford Law Review Online, 64, 63–69.Google Scholar
- Wallmüller, E. (2001). Software-Qualitätsmanagement in der Praxis: Software-Qualität durch Führung und Verbesserung von Software-Prozessen. München: Hanser.Google Scholar
- Wei, X., Gomez, L., Neamtiu, I., & Faloutsos, M. (2012). Malicious android applications in the enterprise: What do they do and how do we fix it? In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops (pp. 251–254).Google Scholar
- Zhan, J., & Rajamani, V. (2008). The economics of privacy-privacy: People, policy and technology. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information Security and Assurance.Google Scholar
- Zukowski, T., & Brown, I. (2007). Examining the influence of demographic factors on internet users’ information privacy concerns. Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries.Google Scholar