Marketing Letters

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 5–15 | Cite as

Defaults, Framing and Privacy: Why Opting In-Opting Out1

  • Eric J. Johnson
  • Steven Bellman
  • Gerald L. Lohse
Article

Abstract

Differences in opt-in and opt-out responses are an important element of the current public debate concerning on-line privacy and more generally for permission marketing. We explored the issue empirically. Using two on-line experiments we show that the default has a major role in determining revealed preferences for further contact with a Web site. We then explore the origins of these differences showing that both framing and defaults have separate and additive effects in affecting the construction of preferences.

privacy consumer choice framing default effects electronic commerce 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baron, Jonathan, and Ilana Ritov. (1994). ''Reference Points and Omission Bias,'' Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 59(3), 475–498.Google Scholar
  2. Baron, Reuben M., and David A. Kenny. (1986). ''The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations,'' Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.Google Scholar
  3. Chapman, Gretchen B., and Eric J. Johnson. (1999). ''Anchoring, Activation, and the Construction of Values,'' Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 79(2), 115-153.Google Scholar
  4. European Union. (1995). ''Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24, October, 1995, on the Protection of Individuals with Regard to the Processing of Personal Data and on the Free Movement of Such Data.''Google Scholar
  5. Fischhoff, Baruch. (1991). ''Value Elicitation: Is there Anything in there?,'' American Psychologist, 46(8), 835–847.Google Scholar
  6. Godin, Seth, and Don Peppers. (1999). Permission Marketing: Turning Strangers Into Friends, and Friends into Customers. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  7. Hoffman, Donna, Thomas Novak, and Marcos Peralta. (1999). ''Building Consumer Trust Online,'' Communications of the ACM, 43, 80–85.Google Scholar
  8. Houston, David A., Steven J. Sherman, and Sara M. Baker. (1989). ''The Influence of Unique Features and Direction of Comparison on Preferences,'' Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 25(2), 121–141.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, Eric J., John Hershey, Jacqueline Meszaros, and Howard Kunreuther. (1993). ''Framing, Probability Distortions, and Insurance Decisions,'' Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7, 35–51.Google Scholar
  10. Kahneman, Daniel. (1999). ''Objective Happiness.'' In Daniel Kahneman, Ed Diener and Norbert Schwarz (eds.), Well-being: The Foundations of Hedonic Psychology, New York, NY, USA: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  11. Kahneman, Daniel, Ilana Ritov, Karen E. Jacowitz, and Paul Grant. (1993). ''Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods: A Psychological Perspective,'' Psychological Science, 4(5), 310–315.Google Scholar
  12. Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky. (1984). ''Choices, Values, and Frames,'' American Psychologist, 39(4), 341–50.Google Scholar
  13. Lohse, Gerald L., Steven Bellman, and Eric J. Johnson. (2000). ''Consumer Buying Behavior on the Internet: Findings from Panel Data,'' Journal of Interactive Marketing, 14, 15–29.Google Scholar
  14. Madrian B. C., and D. Shea. (2001). ''The Power of Suggestion: Inertia 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior,'' Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 116(4) Nov. 2001, pp 1149–1187.Google Scholar
  15. Payne, John W, James R. Bettman, and Eric J. Johnson. (1992). ''Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective,'' Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 87–131.Google Scholar
  16. Samuelson, William, and Richard Zeckhauser. (1988). ''Status Quo Bias in Decision-Making,'' Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1, 7-59.Google Scholar
  17. Schweitzer, Maurice. (1994). ''Disentangling Status Quo and Omission Effects: An Experimental Analysis,'' Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 58(3), 457–476.Google Scholar
  18. Schweitzer, Maurice. (1995). ''Multiple Reference Points, Framing, and the Status Quo Bias in Health Care Financing Decisions,'' Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 63(1), 69–72.Google Scholar
  19. Slovic, Paul. (1995). ''The Construction of Preference,'' American Psychologist, 50(5), 364–371.Google Scholar
  20. Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. (1987). ''Rational choice and the framing of decisions.'' In Robin M. Reder and Melvin W. Hogarth (eds.), Rational Choice: The Contrast between Economics and Psychology. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric J. Johnson
    • 1
  • Steven Bellman
    • 2
  • Gerald L. Lohse
    • 3
  1. 1.The Norman Eig Professor of Business, Uris Hall 514, Department of Marketing, Columbia School of BusinessColumbia UniversityNew York
  2. 2.Lecturer in Electronic Commerce, Graduate School of ManagementUniversity of Western AustraliaNedlands
  3. 3.Accenture The Wanamaker BuildingPhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations