Skip to main content

The role of data privacy in marketing

Abstract

This paper captures the current state of privacy scholarship in marketing and related disciplines. We examine theoretical perspectives and empirical findings about data and information privacy grouped according to privacy’s role in society, the psychology of privacy, and the economics of privacy. Although a coherent subset of research themes provide deep understanding, theoretical and empirical findings show this narrow focus also has constrained our view of privacy to consumer, organizational, ethical, or legal silos. In response, we take a necessary step toward expanding the privacy domain across these borders, emphasizing the compelling synergies that span multiple interests. We conclude by highlighting future research themes that embody a multidimensional approach, which blends the many interconnected concerns that feature in contemporary privacy questions in marketing. Since internal and external stakeholders are affected in multiple and potentially unforeseen ways by data privacy issues, additional work in this space remains critical and needed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. An excellent example involves Indian citizens’ widespread rejection of the Free Basics initiative by Facebook, which offered people limited access to the internet, including Facebook and select other websites. Mass protests occurred in the country to advocate for net neutrality and open access for all. This outcome surprised many experts who viewed the offer as an important step toward connectivity for the poor. Facebook has launched, or plans to launch Free Basics in more than 30 other developing and impoverished countries (BBC News).

  2. The EFF index is comprised of five key protection areas including (1) following industry best practices, (2) telling users about government data demands, (3) disclosing data retention policies, (4) disclosing content removal requests, and (5) opposing government backdoor access to data (www.eff.org).

References

  • Acquisti, A., John, L. K., & Loewenstein, G. (2012). The impact of relative standards on the propensity to disclose. Journal of Marketing Research, 49, 160–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acquisti, A., John, L. K., & Loewenstein, G. (2013). What is privacy worth? The Journal of Legal Studies, 42, 249–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguirre, E., Mahr, D., Grewel, D., Ruyter, K. D., & Wetzels, M. (2015). Unraveling the personalization paradox: The effect of information collection and trust-building strategies on online advertisement effectiveness. Journal of Retailing, 91, 34–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, K. D., & Boush, D. M. (2006). Trustmarks, objective-source ratings, and implied investments in advertising: Investigating online trust and the context-specific nature of internet signals. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34, 308–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social behavior: Privacy, personal space, territory, and crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashworth, L., & Free, C. (2006). Marketing dataveillance and digital privacy: Using theories of justice to understand consumers’ online privacy concerns. Journal of Business Ethics, 67, 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Awad, N. F., & Krishnan, M. S. (2006). The personalization privacy paradox: an empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Quarterly, 30, 13–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bart, Y., Shankar, V., Sultan, F., & Urban, G. L. (2005). Are the drivers and role of online trust the same for all web sites and consumers? A large-scale exploratory empirical study. Journal of Marketing, 69, 133–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleier, A., & Eisenbeiss, M. (2015a). The importance of trust for personalized online advertising. Journal of Retailing, 91, 390–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleier, A., & Eisenbeiss, M. (2015b). Personalized online advertising effectiveness: The interplay of what, when, and where. Marketing Science, 34, 669–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, P. N., Milne, G. R., & Adler, R. (1994). Avoiding misuse of new information technologies: legal and societal considerations. Journal of Marketing, 58, 98–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. E., & Jamal, K. (2006). Privacy rights on the internet: Self-regulation or government regulation? Business Ethics Quarterly, 16, 323–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandimarte, L., Acquisti, A., & Lowenstein, G. (2012). Misplaced confidences: privacy and the control paradox. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 341–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. Oxford, England: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Juric, B., & Lilc, A. (2011). Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. Journal of Service Research, 14, 252–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K., Gordon, L. A., Loeb, M. P., & Zhou, L. (2003). The economic cost of publicly announced information security breaches: Empirical evidence from the stock market. Journal of Computer Security, 11, 431–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casadesus-Masanell, R., & Hervas-Drane, A. (2015). Competing with privacy. Management Science, 61, 229–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caudill, E. M., & Murphy, P. E. (2000). Consumer online privacy: legal and ethical issues. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chellappa, R. K., & Sin, R. G. (2005). Personalization versus Privacy: An empirical examination of the online consumer’s dilemma. Information Technology and Management, 6, 181–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, T. S., Wedel, M., & Rust, R. T. (2016). Adaptive personalization using social networks. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44, 66–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conitzer, V., Taylor, C. R., & Wagman, L. (2012). Hide and seek: Costly consumer privacy in a market with repeat purchases. Marketing Science, 31, 277–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culnan, M. J., & Armstrong, P. K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10(1), 104–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culnan, M. J., & Bies, R. J. (2003). Consumer privacy: Balancing economic and justice considerations. Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 323–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culnan, M. J., & Williams, C. C. (2009). How ethics can enhance organization privacy: Lessons from the Choice Point and TJX data breaches. MIS Quarterly, 33, 673–687.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2004). Internet privacy concerns and their antecedents measurement validity and a regression model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 23, 413–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolnicar, S., & Jordaan, Y. (2007). A market-oriented approach to responsibly managing information privacy concerns in direct marketing. Journal of Advertising, 36, 123–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duhigg, C. (2012). How companies learn your secrets. In New York Times Magazine .Retrieved April 4, 2016 from www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunfee, T. W., Smith, N. C., & Ross, W. T. (1999). Social contracts and marketing ethics. Journal of Marketing, 3, 14–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst & Young (2015), Megatrends 2015: Making sense of a world in motion. EY Global Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2016). EU Commission and United States agree on new framework for transatlantic data flows: EU-US Privacy Shield. Retrieved April 4, 2016 from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm.

  • Ferrell, O. C., & Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49, 87–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fong, N. M., Fang, Z., & Luo, X. (2015). Geo-conquesting: Competitive locational targeting of mobile promotions. Journal of Marketing Research, 52, 726–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foxman, E. R., & Kilcoyne, P. (1993). Marketing practice, and consumer privacy: Ethical issues. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 12, 106–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabisch, J. A., & Milne, G. R. (2014). The impact of compensation on information ownership and privacy control. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 31, 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, A., & Tucker, C. (2011a). Online display advertising: targeting and obtrusiveness. Marketing Science, 30, 389–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, A., & Tucker, C. E. (2011b). Privacy regulation and online advertising. Management Science, 57, 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, A., & Tucker, C. (2012). Shifts in privacy concerns. American Economic Review, 102, 349–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldfarb, A., & Tucker, C. (2013). Why managing customer privacy can be an opportunity. MIT Sloan Management Review, 54, 10–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. (2016). Future crimes: Inside the digital underground and the battle for our connected world. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hann, I. H., Hui, K. L., Tom Lee, S. Y., & Png, I. P. L. (2007). Overcoming online information privacy concerns: An information-processing theory approach. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24, 13–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovav, A., & D’Arcy, J. (2003). The impact of denial-of-service attack announcements on the market value of firms. Risk Management & Insurance Review, 6, 97–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John, L. K., Acquisti, A., & Loewenstein, G. (2011). Strangers on a plane: Context-dependent willingness to divulge sensitive information. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 858–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. G. (1991). Privacy: A significant marketing issue for the 1990s. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10, 133–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgement and choice: mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kannan, K., Rees, J., & Sridhar, S. (2007). Market reactions to information security breach announcements: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 12, 69–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kshetri, N. (2014). Big data’s impact on privacy, security and consumer welfare. Telecommunications Policy, 38, 1134–1145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laczniak, G. R., & Murphy, P. E. (2006). Marketing, consumers, and technology: Perspectives for enhancing ethical transactions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16, 313–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langenderfer, J., & Miyazaki, A. D. (2009). Privacy in the information economy. The Journal of Consumer Affairs., 43, 380–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanier Jr., C. D., & Saini, A. (2008). Understanding consumer privacy: A review and future directions. Academy of Marketing Science Review, 12, 1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenard, T. M., & Rubin, P. H. (2010). In defense of data: Information and the costs of privacy. Policy & Internet, 2, 149–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtblau, E., & Apuzzo, M. (2016). Justice department calls Apple’s refusal to unlock iPhone a ‘marketing strategy.’ New York Times. Retrieved March 11, 2016, from www.nytimes/2016/02/20/business/.

  • Lwin, M., Wirtz, J., & Williams, J. D. (2007). Consumer online privacy concerns and responses: A power-responsibility equilibrium perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35, 572–585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: An integrative framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32, 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, A., & Malhotra, C. K. (2011). Evaluating customer information breaches as service failures: An event study approach. Journal of Service Research, 14, 44–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns: The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15, 336–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manjoo, F. (2015). ‘Right to be forgotten’ online could spread. In New York Times .Retrieved April 4, 2016 from www.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/technology

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, K. (2015). Privacy notices as tabula rasa: An empirical investigation into how complying with a privacy notice is related to meeting privacy expectations online. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing., 34, 210–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, K. D., Borah, A., & Palmatier, R. W. (2016). Data privacy: Effects on customer and firm performance. Journal of Marketing, In-Press. doi:10.1509/jm.15.0497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milberg, S. J., Smith, H. J., & Burke, S. J. (2000). Information privacy: Corporate management and national regulation. Organization Science, 11, 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milne, G. R., & Bahl, S. (2010). Are there differences between consumers’ and marketers’ privacy expectations? A segment-and technology-level analysis. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 29, 138–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milne, G. R., Rohm, A. J., & Bahl, S. (2004). Consumers’ protection of online privacy and identity. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 38, 217–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milne, G. R., Culnan, M. J., & Greene, H. (2006). A longitudinal assessment of online privacy notice readability. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 25, 238–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki, A. D. (2008). Online privacy and the disclosure of cookie use: Effects on consumer trust and anticipated patronage. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing., 27, 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki, A. D., & Fernandez, A. (2000). Internet privacy and security: An examination of online retailer disclosures. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19, 54–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki, A. D., & Krishnamurthy, S. (2002). Internet seals of approval: Effects on online privacy policies and consumer perceptions. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 36, 28–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, Y. (2000). Intimate exchanges: using computers to elicit self-disclosure from consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 26, 323–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morey, T., Forbath, T., & Schoop, A. (2015). Customer data: Designing for transparency and trust. Harvard Business Review, 93, 96–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mothersbaugh, D. L., Foxx II, W. K., Beatty, S. E., & Wang, S. (2012). Disclosure antecedents in an online service context: The role of sensitivity of information. Journal of Service Research, 15, 76–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. E., Laczniak, G. R., Bowie, N. E., & Klein, T. A. (2005). Ethical marketing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nill, A., & Aalberts, R. J. (2014). Legal and ethical challenges of online behavioral targeting in advertising. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 35, 126–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norberg, P. A., & Horne, D. R. (2014). Coping with information requests in marketing exchanges: An examination of pre-post affective and behavioral coping. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42, 415–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Reilly, L. (2015). Microsoft has finally abandoned its Google-bashing ‘Scroogled’ ad campaign. In Business Insider .Retrieved March 11, 2016 from www.businessinsider.com

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohlhausen, M. K. (2014). Privacy challenges and opportunities: The role of the Federal Trade Commission. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 33, 4–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmatier, R. W., Dant, R. P., Grewal, D., & Evans, K. R. (2006). Factors influencing the effectiveness of relationship marketing: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marketing, 70, 136–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, A. (2016). FCC cracks down on Verizon Wireless for using ‘supercookies.’ Washington Post. Retrieved March 11, 2016 from www.washingtonpost.com/news/.

  • Phelps, J., Nowak, G., & Ferrell, E. (2000). Privacy concerns and consumer willingness to provide personal information. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19, 27–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ponemon Institute (2015). 2015 Cost of data breach study: Global analysis. Ponemon Institute Research Report, available at (www.ibm.com/services).

  • Rainie, L., & Duggan, M. (2016). Privacy and information sharing. In Pew Reseach Center .Retrieved April 4, 2016 from www.pewinternet.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romanosky, S., Hoffman, D., & Acquisti, A. (2014). Empirical analysis of data breach litigation. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 11(1), 74–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rust, T. R., Kannan, P. K., & Peng, N. (2002). The customer economics of internet privacy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30, 455–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, A. E., White, T. B., & Lloyd, S. M. (2006). Converting web site visitors: Investment increases consumer trusting beliefs and online purchase intentions. Journal of Marketing, 70, 133–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumann, J. H., Wangenheim, F. V., & Groene, N. (2014). Targeted online advertising reciprocity appeals to increase acceptance among users of free web services. Journal of Marketing, 78, 59–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, R., & Borle, S. (2015). Estimating the contextual risk of data breach: An empirical approach. Journal of Management Information Systems, 32(2), 314–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, K. B. (2005). In poor health: An assessment of privacy policies at direct-to-consumer websites. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 24(2), 273–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, K. B., & Hoy, M. G. (1999). Flaming, complaining, abstaining: how online users respond to privacy concerns. Journal of Advertising, 28(3), 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan, K. B., & Hoy, M. G. (2000). Dimensions of privacy concern among online consumers. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, N. (2012), Mapping, and sharing, the consumer genome. New York Times. Retrieved April 4, 2016 from www.nytimes/2012/06/17/technology.

  • Smith, J. H., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, J. B. (1996). Information privacy: Measuring individuals’ concerns about organizational practices. MIS Quarterly, 167–196.

  • Solove, D. J. (2008). Understanding privacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solove, D. J. (2011). Nothing to hide: The false tradeoff between privacy and security. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tirunillai, S., & Tellis, G. J. (2014). Mining marketing meaning from online chatter: strategic brand analysis of big data using latent Dirichlet allocation. Journal of Marketing Research, 51, 463–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, J. Y., Egelman, S., Cranor, L., & Acquisti, A. (2011). The effect of online privacy information behavior: An experimental study. Information Systems Research, 22, 254–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, C. E. (2014). Social networks, personalized advertising and privacy controls. Journal of Marketing Research, 51, 1547–7193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vail, M. W., Earp, J. B., & Antón, A. I. (2008). An empirical study of consumer perceptions and comprehension of web site privacy policies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55, 442–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, S., & Brandeis. L. (1890). The Right to Privacy. In F. Schoeman (Ed.), Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy (pp. 75–103). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Originally published in Harvard Law Review, 4 p. 193).

  • Westin, A. (1967). Privacy and freedom. New York: Antheneum.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, T. B. (2004). Consumer disclosure and disclosure avoidance: a motivational framework. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14, 41–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White House (2012). Consumer data privacy in a networked world: A framework for protecting privacy and promoting innovation in the global digital economy. D.C.: Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • White House (2014). Big data: Seizing opportunities, preserving values. D.C.: Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, T. B., Zahay, D. L., Thorbjørnsen, H., & Shavitt, S. (2008). Getting too personal: Reactance to highly personalized email solicitations. Marketing Letters, 19, 40–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, J., & Lwin, M. O. (2009). Regulatory focus theory, trust, and privacy concern. Journal of Service Research, 20, 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, H., Teo, H. H., Tan, B. C. Y., & Agarwal, R. (2012). Effects of individual self-protection industry self-regulation, and government regulation on privacy concerns: A study of location based services. Information Systems Research, 23, 1342–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the insightful feedback of the Editor-in-Chief and the anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelly D. Martin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Martin, K.D., Murphy, P.E. The role of data privacy in marketing. J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 45, 135–155 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-016-0495-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-016-0495-4

Keywords

  • Privacy
  • Big data
  • Ethics
  • Review article