European Journal of Information Systems

, Volume 26, Issue 6, pp 642–660 | Cite as

Antecedents and outcomes of information privacy concerns in a peer context: An exploratory study

  • Zafer D. Ozdemir
  • H. Jeff SmithEmail author
  • John H. Benamati
Empirical Research


Academic studies typically view privacy threats as originating solely from organizations. With the rise of social media, such a view is incomplete because consumers increasingly face risks from peers’ misuse of data. In this paper, we study information privacy in the context of peer relationships on commercial social media sites. We develop a model that considers relationships between the constructs of privacy experiences, privacy awareness, trust, risk, and benefits and how those relationships impact individuals’ disclosure behaviors. We test the model by creating a survey that includes a number of measures that were taken directly from or were closely based on measures from prior studies. We conduct seven pilot tests of undergraduate students in order to validate the survey items. Working with the online survey firm Qualtrics, we gather a dataset of 314 Facebook users’ responses to our validated survey, and we test our model using partial least squares techniques. We find that both privacy experiences and privacy awareness are quite significant predictors of privacy concerns. We also find that trust, risk, benefits, and privacy concerns work together to explain a large amount (37%) of the variance in disclosure behaviors. We discuss implications for practice and for future research.


privacy concerns peer behavioral outcomes disclosure 


  1. Acquisti A (2004) Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate gratification. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Electronic Commerce Conference, pp 21–29, ACM Press, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  2. Acquisti A, Brandimarte L and Loewenstein G (2015) Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science 347(6221), 509–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acquisti A and Grossklags J (2005) Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security & Privacy 3, 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Acquisti A, John L and Lowenstein G (2012) The impact of relative standards on the propensity to disclose. Journal of Marketing Research 49(2), 160–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. AIS (2016) Senior scholars’ basket of journals. Accessed on August 30, 2016.
  6. Anderson CL and Agarwal R (2011) The digitization of healthcare: boundary risks, emotion, and consumer willingness to disclose personal health information. Information Systems Research 22(3), 469–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Angst CM and Agarwal R (2009) Adoption of electronic health records in the presence of privacy concerns: the elaboration likelihood model and individual persuasion. MIS Quarterly 33(2), 339–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Awad NF and Krishnan MS (2006) The personalization privacy paradox: an empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Quarterly 30(1), 13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bansal G, Zahedi FM and Gefen D (2010) The impact of personal dispositions on information sensitivity, privacy concern and trust in disclosing health information online. Decision Support Systems 49(2), 138–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bansal G, Zahedi FM and Gefen D (2015) The role of privacy assurance mechanisms in building trust and the moderating role of privacy concern. European Journal of Information Systems 24(6), 624–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bansal G, Zahedi FM and Gefen D (2016) Do context and personality matter? Trust and privacy concerns in disclosing private information online. Information & Management 53(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bélanger F and Crossler R (2011) Privacy in the digital age: A review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Quarterly 35(4), 1017–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Berg J, Dickhaut J and Mccabe K (1995) Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior 10(1), 122–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Blatt SJ (1990) Interpersonal relatedness and self-definition: Two personality configurations and their implications for psychopathology and psychotherapy. In Repression: Defense mechanisms and personality (Singer JL, Ed), pp 299–335, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  15. Chellappa RK and Shivendu S (2007) An economic model of privacy: A property rights approach to regulatory choices for online personalization. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(3), 193–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chen J, Ping JW, Xu Y and Tan BCY (2015) Information privacy concerns about peer disclosure in online social networks. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 62(3), 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chin WW and Newsted PR (1999) Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In Statistical strategies for small sample research (Hoyle R, Ed), pp 307–341, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  18. Choi BCF, Jiang J, Xiao B and Kim SS (2015) Embarrassing exposures in online social networks: an integrated perspective of privacy invasion and relationship bonding. Information Systems Research 26(4), 675–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Conger S, Pratt JH and Loch KD (2013) Personal information privacy and emerging technologies. Information Systems Journal 23(5), 401–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Culnan MJ and Bies RJ (2003) Consumer privacy: balancing economic and justice considerations. Journal of Social Issues 59(2), 323–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP and Warshaw PR (1989) User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science 35(8), 982–1003. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Davis J and Jurgenson N (2014) Context collapse: theorizing context collusions and collisions. Information, Communication & Society 17(4), 476–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Debatin B, Lovejoy JP, Horn A and Huges BN (2009) Facebook and online privacy: Attitudes, behaviors, and unintended consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 15, 83–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dinev T, Bellotto M, Hart P, Russo V, Serra I and Colauti C (2006) Privacy calculus model in e-commerce – a study of Italy and the United States. European Journal of Information Systems 15, 389–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dinev T and Hart P (2006) An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research 17(1), 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dinev T, Hart P and Mullen MR (2008) Internet privacy concerns and beliefs about government surveillance: an empirical investigation. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 17(3), 214–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dinev T, Mcconnell AR and Smith HJ (2015) Informing privacy research through information systems, psychology, and behavioral economics: thinking outside the ‘APCO’ box. Information Systems Research 26(4), 639–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dinev T, Xu H, Smith HJ and Hart P (2013) Information privacy and correlates: an empirical attempt to bridge and distinguish privacy-related concepts. European Journal of Information Systems 22(3), 295–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Eastlick MA, Lotz SL and Warrington P (2006) Understanding online B-to-C relationships: an integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, and commitment. Journal of Business Research 59(8), 877–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Foddy M, Platow MJ and Yamagishi T (2009) Group-based trust in strangers: the role of stereotypes and expectations. Psychological Science 20(4), 419–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fornell C and Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1), 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gefen D and Straub DW (2005) A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-graph: tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 16(5), 39–50.Google Scholar
  33. Gerlach J, Widjaja T and Buxmann P (2015) Handle with care: how online network providers’ privacy policies impact users’ information sharing behavior. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 24(1), 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Greenaway KE, Chan YE and Crossler R (2015) Company information privacy orientation: a conceptual framework. Information Systems Journal 25(6), 579–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM and Sarstedt M (2017) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
  36. Hann I-H, Hui K-L, Lee S-YT and Png IPL (2007) Overcoming online information privacy concerns: an information-processing theory approach. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(2), 13–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hinde RA (1979) Toward Understanding Relationships, Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  38. Hong W and Thong JYL (2013) Internet privacy concerns: an integrated conceptualization and four empirical studies. MIS Quarterly 37(1), 275–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hu T, Kettinger WJ and Poston RS (2015) The effect of online social value on satisfaction and continued use of social media. European Journal of Information Systems 24(4), 391–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hui KL, Teo HH and Lee SYT (2007) The value of privacy assurance: an exploratory field experiment. MIS Quarterly 31(1), 19–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jarvenpaa SL, Tractinsky N, Saarinen N and Vitale M (1999) Consumer trust in an internet store: a cross-cultural validation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 5(2), 44–71.Google Scholar
  42. Jarvenpaa SL, Tractinsky N and Vitale M (2000) Consumer trust in an internet store. Information Technology Management 1, 45–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jiang J, Heng CS and Choi BCF (2013) Privacy concerns and privacy-protective behavior in synchronous online social interactions. Information Systems Research 24(3), 579–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Junglas IA, Johnson NA and Spitzmueller C (2008) Personality traits and concern for privacy: an empirical study in the context of location-based services. European Journal of Information Systems 17(4), 387–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Karahasanovic A, Brandtzæg PB, Heim J, Lüders M, Vermeir L, Pierson J et al (2009) Co-creation and user-generated content – elderly people’s user requirements. Computers in Human Behavior 25(3), 655–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kehr F, Kowatsch T, Wentzel D and Fleisch E (2015) Blissfully ignorant: the effects of general privacy concerns, general institutional trust, and affect in the privacy calculus. Information Systems Journal 25(6), 607–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Keith MJ, Babb JS, Lowry PB, Furner CP and Abdullat A (2015) The role of mobile-computing self-efficacy in consumer information disclosure. Information Systems Journal 25(6), 637–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Krasnova H, Spiekermann S, Koroleva K and Hildebrand T (2010) Online social networks: why we disclose. Journal of Information Technology 25, 109–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Krasnova H and Veltri NF (2010) Privacy calculus on social networking sites: explorative evidence from Germany and USA. In 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.Google Scholar
  50. Ku Y (2013) Why do users continue using social networking sites? An exploratory study of members in the United States and Taiwan. Information & Management 50(7), 571–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lee D-J, Ahn J-H and Bang Y (2011) Managing consumer privacy concerns in personalization: a strategic analysis of privacy protection. MIS Quarterly 35(2), 423–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Li H, Sarathy R, and Xu H (2011) The role of affect and cognition on online consumers’ decision to disclose personal information to unfamiliar online vendors. Decision Support Systems 51(3), 434–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Li H, Sarathy R and Zhang J (2008) The role of emotions in shaping consumers’ privacy beliefs about unfamiliar online vendors. Journal of Information Privacy & Security 4(3), 36–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Li T and Unger T (2012) Willing to pay for quality personalization? Trade-off between quality and privacy. European Journal of Information Systems 21(6), 621–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Li Y (2011) Empirical studies on online information privacy concerns: literature review and an integrative framework. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 28(1), 453–496.Google Scholar
  56. Lindell MK and Whitney DJ (2001) Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology 86(1), 114–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Livingstone S (2008) Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression New Media Society 10(3), 393–411.Google Scholar
  58. Lowry PB, Cao J and Everard A (2011) Privacy concerns versus desire for interpersonal awareness in driving the use of self-disclosure technologies: the case of instant messaging in two cultures. Journal of Management Information Systems 27(4), 163–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lowry PB and Gaskin J (2014) Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modelling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: when to choose it and how to use it. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 57(2), 123–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lowry PB, Wilson DW and Haig WL (2014) A picture is worth a thousand words: source credibility theory applied to logo and website design for heightened credibility and consumer trust. International Journal of HumanComputer Interaction 30(1), 63–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lu HP and Hsiao KL (2010) The influence of extro/introversion on the intention to pay for social networking sites. Information & Management 47(3), 150–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Malhotra NK, Kim SS and Agarwal J (2004) Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): the construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research 15(4), 336–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mangelsdorf ME (2007) Beyond enterprise 2.0. MIT Sloan Management Review 48(3), 50–55.Google Scholar
  64. Marwick A and Ellison N (2012) There isn’t wifi in heaven! Negotiating visibility on Facebook memorial pages. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56(3), 378–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Matook S, Brown SA and Rolf J (2015) Forming an intention to act on recommendations given via online social networks. European Journal of Information Systems 24(1), 76–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Mayer RC, Davis JH and Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review 20(3), 709–734.Google Scholar
  67. Mcallister DJ (1995) Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal 38(1), 24–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Mcknight DH, Choudhury H and Kacmar C (2002) Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: an integrative typology. Information Systems Research 13(3), 334–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Mello JA (2012) Social media, employee privacy and concerted activity: brave new world or big brother? Labor Law Journal 63(3), 165–173.Google Scholar
  70. Metzger MJ (2004) Privacy, trust, and disclosure: exploring barriers to electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 9(4).Google Scholar
  71. Milberg SJ, Smith HJ and Burke SJ (2000) Information privacy: corporate management and national regulation. Organization Science 11(1), 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Miltgen CL and Peyrat-Guillard D (2014) Cultural and generational influences on privacy concerns: a qualitative study in seven European countries. European Journal of Information Systems 23(2), 103–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Moody GD, Galletta DF and Lowry PB (2014) When trust and distrust collide online: the engenderment and role of consumer ambivalence in online consumer behavior. Electronic Commerce Research & Applications 13(4), 266–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Moreland RL (2010) Are dyads really groups? Small Group Research 41(2), 251–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Morris JB (2016) First look: internet use in 2015. Accessed on September 7, 2016.
  76. Morrison EW and Robinson SL (1997) When employees feel betrayed: a model of how psychological contract violation develops. Academy of Management Review 22(2), 226–256.Google Scholar
  77. Norberg PA, Horne DR and Horne DA (2007) The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs 41(1), 100–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Oetzel MC and Spiekermann S (2014) A systematic methodology for privacy impact assessments: a design science approach. European Journal of Information Systems 23(2), 126–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Park S and Chung N (2011) Mediating roles of self-presentation desire in online game community commitment and trust behavior of massive multiplayer online role-playing games. Computers in Human Behavior 27(6), 2372–2379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pate J and Malone C (2000) Enduring perceptions of violation. Human Resource Management Journal 8(6), 28–31.Google Scholar
  81. Pavlou PA (2003) Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce – integrating trust and risk, with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 7(3), 101–134.Google Scholar
  82. Pavlou PA and Gefen D (2005) Psychological contract violation in online marketplaces: antecedents, consequences, and moderating role. Information Systems Research 16(4), 372–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Pettersen L and Brandtzaeg PB (2012) Privacy Challenges in Enterprise 2.0. Association of Internet Researchers Salford, UK.Google Scholar
  84. Petty R and Cacioppo J (1986) Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. Springer, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Petty R and Wegener D (1998) Attitude change: multiple roles for persuasion variables. In Handbook of Social Psychology (Gilbert D, Fiske S, Lindzey G, Eds), pp 323–390, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  86. Pew Research (2016) The state of privacy in America: what we learned. Accessed on August 30, 2016.
  87. Posey C, Lowry PB and Roberts TL (2010) Proposing the online community self-disclosure model: the case of working professionals in France and the UK who use online communities. European Journal of Information Systems 19(2), 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Rau P-LP, Gao Q and Ding Y (2008) Relationship between the level of intimacy and lurking in online social network services. Computers in Human Behavior 24(6), 2757–2770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Raynes-Goldie K (2010) Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: understanding privacy in the age of Facebook. First Monday 15(14), article 32.Google Scholar
  90. Ridings CM, Gefen D and Arinze B (2002) Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11(34), 271–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Ringle CM, Wende S and Becker JM (2015) SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS GmbH, Boenningstedt.
  92. Robinson SL (1996) Trust and breach of the psychological contract. Administrative Science Quarterly 41(4), 574–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Rose E (2006) An examination of the concern for information privacy in the New Zealand regulatory context. Information & Management 43(3), 322–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Rousseau DM (1989) Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities Rights Journal 2(1), 121–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Schoenbachler DD and Gordon GL (2002) Trust and customer willingness to provide information in database-driven relationship marketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing 16(3), 2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Sheehan KB (1999) An investigation of gender differences in on-line privacy concerns and resultant behaviors. Journal of Interactive Marketing 13(4), 24–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Sheng H, Nah FF and Siau K (2008) An experimental study on ubiquitous commerce adoption: impact of personalization and privacy concerns. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 9(6), 344–377.Google Scholar
  98. Smith HJ (1994) Managing Privacy: Information Technology and Corporate America, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.Google Scholar
  99. Smith HJ, Dinev T and Xu H (2011) Information privacy research: an interdisciplinary review. MIS Quarterly 35(4), 989–1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Smith HJ, Milberg JS and Burke JS (1996) Information privacy: measuring individuals’ concerns about organizational practices. MIS Quarterly 20(2), 167–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Son J-Y and Kim SS (2008) Internet users’ information privacy-protective responses: a taxonomy and a nomological model. MIS Quarterly 32(3), 503–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Straub DW (1989) Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS Quarterly 13(2), 147–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Straub DW, Boudreau M-C and Gefen D (2004) Validation guidelines for is positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 13(24), 380–427.Google Scholar
  104. Sutanto J, Palme E, Tan C-H and Phang CW (2013) Addressing the personalization-privacy paradox: an empirical assessment from a field experiment on smartphone users MIS Quarterly 37(4), 1141–1164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Tang Z, Hu Y and Smith MD (2008) Gaining trust through online privacy protection: self-regulation, mandatory standards, or caveat emptor. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(4), 153–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Tow WN-FH, Dell P and Venable J (2010) Understanding information disclosure behaviour in Australian Facebook users. Journal of Information Technology 25(2), 126–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. TRUSTe (2016) U.S. consumer privacy index 2016. Accessed on August 30, 2016.
  108. Tsai JY, Egelman S, Cranor L and Acquisti A (2011) The effect of online privacy information on purchasing behavior: an experimental study. Information Systems Research 22(2), 254–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Van Eerde W and Thierry H (1996) Vroom’s expectancy models and work-related criteria: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 81(5), 575–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Van Slyke C, Shim JT, Johnson R and Jiang JJ (2006) Concern for information privacy and online consumer purchasing. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 7(6), 415–444.Google Scholar
  111. Venkatesh V and Davis FD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 46(2), 186–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Vitak J (2012) The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56(4), 451–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Vroom VH (1964) Work and Motivation, Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
  114. Wakefield R (2013) The influence of user affect in online information disclosure. Journal of Strategic Information Systems 22(2), 157–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Wall JD, Lowry PB and Barlow JB (2016) Organizational violations of externally governed privacy and security rules: explaining and predicting selective violations under conditions of strain and excess. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 17(1), 39–76.Google Scholar
  116. Walther J, Van Der Heide B, Hamel L and Shulman H (2009) Self-generated versus other-generated statements and impressions in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research 36(2), 229–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Warkentin M, Johnston AC and Shropshire J (2011) The influence of the informal social learning environment on information privacy policy compliance efficacy and intention. European Journal of Information Systems 20(3), 267–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Weaver AC and Morrison BB (2008) Social networking. Computer 41(2), 97–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Witte EH (2013) Small-group research and the crisis of social psychology: an introduction. In Understanding Group Behavior: Small Group Processes and Interpersonal Relations (Witte EH, Davis JH, Eds), pp 1–8, Psychology Press, New York.Google Scholar
  120. Xu H (2007) The effects of self-construal and perceived control on privacy concerns. In Proceedings of 28th Annual International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Montreal.Google Scholar
  121. Xu H, Dinev T, Smith HJ and Hart P (2011) Information privacy concerns: linking individual perceptions with institutional privacy assurances. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 12(12), 798–824.Google Scholar
  122. Xu H, Teo H-H, Tan BCY and Agarwal R (2009) The role of push–pull technology in privacy calculus: the case of location-based services. Journal of Management Information Systems 26(3), 135–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Xu H, Teo HH and Tan BCY (2005) Predicting the adoption of location-based services: the roles of trust and privacy risk. In Proceedings of 26th Annual International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), pp 897–910, Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar
  124. Xu H, Teo HH, Tan BCY and 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(4), 1342–1363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Yu J, Hu PJ-H and Tsang-Hsiang C (2015) Role of affect in self-disclosure on social network websites: a test of two competing models. Journal of Management Information Systems 32(2), 239–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Zhao L, Lu Y and Gupta S (2012) Disclosure intention of location-related information in location-based social network services. International Journal of Electronic Commerce 16(4), 53–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The OR Society 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zafer D. Ozdemir
    • 1
  • H. Jeff Smith
    • 2
    Email author
  • John H. Benamati
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Information Systems and Analytics, Farmer School of BusinessMiami University (Ohio)OxfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of Information Systems and Analytics, Farmer School of BusinessMiami University (Ohio)OxfordUSA
  3. 3.Department of Information Systems and Analytics, Farmer School of BusinessMiami University (Ohio)OxfordUSA

Personalised recommendations