Advertisement

Journal of Information Technology

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 126–136 | Cite as

Understanding information disclosure behaviour in Australian Facebook users

  • William Newk-Fon Hey Tow
  • Peter Dell
  • John Venable
Research Article

Abstract

The advent of social networking websites presents further opportunities for criminals to obtain information for use in identity theft, cyber-stalking, and worse activities. This paper presents research investigating why users of social networking websites willingly disclose personal information and what sorts of information they provide (or not). The study employed an ethnographic approach of participation in the online community and interviews of community members, combined with a quantitative survey. The findings show that users are often simply not aware of the issues or feel that the risk to them personally is very low. The paper develops a preliminary theoretical model to explain the information disclosure phenomenon. It further recommends that government agencies or social networking websites themselves conduct campaigns to inform the public of these issues and that social networking websites consider removing some facilities. The study was conducted in an Australian context and focussed on the popular Facebook website.

Keywords

social networking websites Facebook privacy information disclosure identity theft 

References

  1. Acquisti, A. and Gross, R. (2006). Imagined Communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the facebook, in Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, PET 2006 (Robinson College, Cambridge, UK); Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 28–30 June, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.93.8177&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
  2. Atkinson, S. and Abu El Haj, M. (1996). Domain Analysis for Qualitative Public Health Data, Health Policy and Planning 11 (4): 438–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyd, D. (2006). Identity Production in a Networked Culture: Why youth heart MySpace, in Conference Paper Talk at AAAS 2006 (part of panel: ‘It’s 10PM: Do You Know Where Your Children Are … Online!’) (St. Louis, Missouri, 19 February 2006).Google Scholar
  4. Boyd, D. and Heer, J. (2006). Profiles as Conversation: Networked identity performance on friendster, in Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS '06, (Kauai, Hawaii); New York: IEEE digital library, Vol.3, 59c–59c, 4–7 January, doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2006.394, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1579411&isnumber=33363.
  5. Boyd, D.M. and Ellison, N.B. (2008). Social Network Sites: Definition, history, and scholarship, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (2008): 210–230.Google Scholar
  6. Brooks, G. (2007). Secret Society, New Media Age, 13 December, p. 10.Google Scholar
  7. Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A. and Nejdl, W. (2007). The Adaptive Web: Methods and strategies of web personalization, Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Campbell, J., Sherman, R.C., Kraan, E. and Birchmeier, Z. (2001). Internet Privacy Awareness and Concerns among College Students, Paper presented to APS, Toronto, June 2001 [www document] http://www.users.muohio.edu/shermarc/aps01.htm.
  9. Caruso, J.B. and Salaway, G. (2008). The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2008, [www document] http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EKF/ekf0808.pdf (accessed 4th May 2009).
  10. Cranor, L.F., Reagle, J. and Ackerman, M.S. (1999). Beyond Concern: Understanding net users’ attitudes about online privacy, AT&T, [www document] http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cranor99beyond.html.
  11. Dell, P. and Marinova, D. (2002). Erving Goffman and the Internet, Theory of Science 24 (4): 85–98.Google Scholar
  12. Denzin, N.K. (1971). The Logic of Naturalistic Inquiry, Social Forces 50 (2): 166–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dinev, T. and Hart, P. (2006). Internet Privacy Concerns and Social Awareness as Determinants of Intention to Transact, International Journal of Electronic Commerce 10 (2): 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S.R. and Passerini, K. (2007). Trust and Privacy Concern within Social Networking Sites: A comparison of Facebook and MySpace, in Proceedings of the Thirteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (Keystone, Colorado); New York: Curran Associates, Inc., http://csis.pace.edu/~dwyer/research/DwyerAMCIS2007.pdf.Google Scholar
  15. Ellison, N.B., Steinfield, C. and Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook ‘Friends’: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007): 1143–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Facebook (2008). About Facebook [www document] http://www.Facebook.com/about.php (accessed 7th April 2008).
  17. Fogg, B.J. (2003). Persuasive Technology: Using computers to change what we think and do, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Frankel, M.S. and Siang, S. (1999). Ethical and Legal Aspects of Human Subjects Research on the Internet, American Association for the Advancement of Science [www document] http://www.aaas.org/spp/sfrl/projects/intres/report.pdf.
  19. Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of Grounded Theory Analysis, Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  21. Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in Public Places, New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Govani, T. and Pashley, H. (2005). Student Awareness of the Privacy Implications When Using Facebook, unpublished manuscript [www document] http://lorrie.cranor.org/courses/fa05/tubzhlp.pdf.
  23. Gray, R. and Montague, B. (2007). Criminals Trawl Facebook and MySpace, The Telegraph (UK) [www document] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1558125/Criminals-trawl-Facebook-and-MySpace.html.
  24. Gross, R., Acquisti, A. and Heinz III, H.J. (2005). Information Revelation and Privacy in Online Social Networks (The Facebook case), in Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (Alexandria, VA, USA); New York: ACM, 71–80.Google Scholar
  25. Hardin, R. (2002). Trust & Trustworthiness, New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Hardin, R. (2004). Distrust, New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Handwerker, W.P. (2005). Sample Design, in K. Kempf-Leonard (ed.) Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, New York: Academic Press, pp. 429–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose Space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (2008): 276–297.Google Scholar
  29. Henri, C. (1991). Computer Conferencing and Content Analysis, in A. Kaye (ed.) Collaborative Learning through Computer Conferencing: The Najaden papers, London: Springer-Verlag, pp. 117–136.Google Scholar
  30. Hosaka, T.A. (2008). Facebook Asks Users to Translate for Free, MSNBC [WWW document] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24205912/.
  31. Jarvis, J. (2007). Amazing Facebook, [www document] http://www.buzzmachine.com/2007/05/29/amazing-Facebook/.
  32. Klein, A. (2006). Facebook Opens Too Many Doors?, Planet Blacksburg [www document] http://www.planetblacksburg.com/news/klein-Facebook-042606.html.
  33. Kobsa, A. (2007). Privacy-Enabled Web Personalization, Communications of the ACM 50 (8): 24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kolek, E.A. and Saunders, D. (2008). Online Disclosure: An empirical examination of undergraduate facebook profiles, NASPA Journal 45 (1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lampe, C., Ellison, N. and Steinfield, C. (2006). A Face(book) in the Crowd: Social searching vs. social browsing, in Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (Alberta, Canada); New York: ACM, 167–170, http://portal.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=1180901&type=pdf&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=87544933&CFTOKEN=31631052.
  36. Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry, California: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  37. Lipford, H.R., Besmer, A. and Watson, J. (2008). Understanding Privacy Settings in Facebook with an Audience View, in Proceedings: Usability, Psychology and Security ‘08 [www document] https://www.usenix.org/events/upsec08/tech/full_papers/lipford/lipford.pdf.Google Scholar
  38. Malik, O. (2007). Facebook Launches Mobile, Takes $240 Million Investment from Microsoft, [WWW document] http://gigaom.com/2007/10/24/Facebook-and-microsoft-bff-for-240-million/.
  39. Mantovani, F. (2001). Networked Seduction: A test-bed for the study of strategic communication on the internet, CyberPsychology and Behavior 4 (1): 147–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, Self and Society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  41. Meyrowitz, J. (1990). Redefining the Situation: Extending dramaturgy into a theory of social change and media effects, in S.H. Riggins (ed.) Beyond Goffman: Studies on communication, institution and social interaction, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  42. Minister for Home Affairs (2008). New Identity Crime Offences Proposed [media release] [www document] http://www.ministerhomeaffairs.gov.au/www/ministers/ministerdebus.nsf/Page/Media Releases_2008_Firstquarter_27March2008-Newidentitycrimeoffencesproposed.Google Scholar
  43. Mullen, S. (2005). Media Choice, Interpersonal Relationships, and Problem Solving, in IADIS Virtual Multi Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (MCCSIS 2005) (Lisbon, Portugal); Lisbon, Portugal: IADIS Digital Library, http://www.iadis.net/dl/final_uploads/200504G005.pdf.
  44. Network Security (2006). ‘Social Networking’ Study Shows Cybercrime Risk, Network Security 2006 (11): 2.Google Scholar
  45. Office of the Attorney General (2003). Australia's First Cyberstalking laws [media release] [www document] http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/newmedia.nsf/bc348d5912436a9cca256cfc0082d800/2550a989153b5bebca256cf600824ef2!OpenDocument.
  46. Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L. and Wynaden, D. (2001). Ethics in Qualitative Research, Journal of Nursing Scholarship 33 (1): 93–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Paine, C., Reips, U.D., Stieger, S., Joinson, A. and Buchanan, T. (2006). Internet Users’ Perceptions of ‘Privacy Concerns’ and ‘Privacy Actions’, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65 (6): 526–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Seaman, C.B. (1999). Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 25 (4): 557–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sjöberg, L. (2000). Factors in Risk Perception, Risk Analysis 20 (1): 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Skiba, D.J. (2007). Nursing Education 2.0: Poke me. Where's your face in space? Nursing Education Perspectives 28 (4): 214–216.Google Scholar
  51. Sophos (2007). Sophos Facebook ID Probe Shows 41% of Users Happy to Reveal all to Potential Identity Thieves [media release], [www document] http://www.sophos.com/pressoffice/news/articles/2007/08/Facebook.html.
  52. Sorrell, J.M. and Redmond, G.M. (1995). Interviews in Qualitative Nursing Research: Differing approaches for ethnographic and phenomenological studies, Journal of Advanced Nursing 21: 1117–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Spradley, J. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview, New York: Holt.Google Scholar
  54. Stolen ID (2008). Television Program, SBS Television, Australia, broadcast 19 May.Google Scholar
  55. Strater, K. and Richter, H. (2007). Examining Privacy and Disclosure in a Social Networking Community, in Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS) 2007: Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, (Pittsburgh, USA, 18–20 July 2007); New York: ACM, http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2007/posters/p157_strater.pdf.
  56. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques, London: Sage.Google Scholar
  57. Watson, S.W., Smith, Z. and Driver, J. (2006). Alcohol, Sex and Illegal Activities: An analysis of selected Facebook central photos in fifty states, Education Resources Information Center [www document] http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED493049.

Copyright information

© Association for Information Technology Trust 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • William Newk-Fon Hey Tow
    • 1
  • Peter Dell
    • 1
  • John Venable
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Information Systems, Curtin University of TechnologyBentleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations