Contextualized Communication of Privacy Practices and Personalization Benefits: Impacts on Users’ Data Sharing and Purchase Behavior

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3424)


Consumer surveys demonstrated that privacy statements on the web are ineffective in alleviating users’ privacy concerns. We propose a new user interface design approach in which the privacy practices of a website are explicated in a contextualized manner, and users’ benefits in providing personal data clearly explained. To test the merits of this approach, we conducted a user experiment that compared two versions of a personalized web store: one with a traditional global disclosure and one that additionally provides contextualized explanations of privacy practices and personaliza tion benefits. We found that subjects in the second condition were sign ifi cantly more willing to share personal data with the website, rated its privacy practices and the perceived benefit resulting from data disclosure sig ni fi cantly higher, and also made considerably more purchases. We discuss the implications of these results and point out open research questions.


Privacy Policy Personal Data Privacy Practice Personalization Benefit Privacy Preference 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ackerman, M.S., Cranor, L.F., Reagle, J.: Privacy in E-commerce: Examining User Scenarios and Privacy Preferences. In: First ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, Denver, CO, pp. 1–8 (1999),
  2. 2.
    Culnan, M.J., Milne, G.R.: The Culnan-Milne Survey on Consumers & Online Privacy Notices: Summary of Responses. In: Interagency Public Workshop:Get Noticed: Effective Financial Privacy Notices, Washington, D.C. (2001),
  3. 3.
    Department for Trade and Industry: Informing Consumers about E-Commerce. Conducted by MORI, London: DTI, London (2001),
  4. 4.
    GartnerG2: Privacy and Security: The Hidden Growth Strategy (August 2001),
  5. 5.
    Roy Morgan Research: Privacy and the Community. Prepared for theOffice of the Federal Privacy Commissioner, Sydney (2001),
  6. 6.
    A Survey of Consumer Privacy Attitudes and Behaviors. Harris Interactive (2001),
  7. 7.
    The Information Marketplace: Merging and Exchanging Consumer Data, March 13, 2001. Federal Trade Commission (2001),
  8. 8.
    Kohavi, R.: Mining E-Commerce Data: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly. In: Seventh ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, pp. 8–13 (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abrams, M.: Making Notices Work For Real People. In: 25th International Conference of Data Protection & Privacy Commissioners, Sydney, Australia (2003),
  10. 10.
    Brodie, C., Karat, C.-M., Karat, J.: How Personalization of an E-Commerce Website Affects Consumer Trust. In: Karat, J. (ed.) Designing Personalized User Experience for eCommerce, pp. 185–206. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kobsa, A., Koenemann, J., Pohl, W.: Personalized Hypermedia Presentation Techniques for Improving Customer Relationships. The Knowledge Engineering Review 16, 111–155 (2001), zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Teltzrow, M., Kobsa, A.: Impacts of User Privacy Preferences on Personalized Systems: a Comparative Study. In: Karat, C.-M., Blom, J., Karat, J. (eds.) Designing Personalized User Experiences for eCommerce, pp. 315–332. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004), CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    Cranor, L.F., Reidenberg, J.R.: Can User Agents Accurately Represent Privacy Notices? In: 30th Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy, Alexandria, VA (2002),
  15. 15.
    AT&T Privacybird (2002),
  16. 16.
    Abrams, M.: The Notices Project: Common Short Informing Notices. In: Interagency Public Workshop: Get Noticed: Effective Financial Privacy Notices, Washington, DC (2001),
  17. 17.
    Palen, L., Dourish, P.: Unpacking “Privacy” for a Networked World. CHI 2002, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 129–136 (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., Berendt, B.: E-privacy in 2nd Generation E-Commerce: Privacy Preferences versus Actual Behavior. In: EC 2001: Third ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, Tampa, FL, pp. 38–47 (2001),
  19. 19.
    Berendt, B., Günther, O., Spiekermann, S.: Privacy in E-Commerce: Stated Preferences vs. Actual Behavior. Communications of the ACM (to appear) (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Personalization & Privacy Survey. Personalization Consortium (2000),
  21. 21.
    Friedman, B., Howe, D.C., Felten, E.: Informed Consent in the Mozilla Browser: Implementing Value-Sensitive Design. In: 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Patrick, A.S., Kenny, S.: From Privacy Legislation to Interface Design: Implementing Information Privacy in Human-Computer Interfaces. In: Dingledine, R. (ed.) PET 2003. LNCS, vol. 2760, pp. 107–124. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    EU: 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. Official Journal of the European Communities, 31 (1995),
  24. 24.
    van Duyne, D.K., Landay, J.A., Hong, J.I.: The Design of Sites: Patterns, Principles, and Processes for Crafting a Customer-Centered Web Experience. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shneiderman, B., Plaisant, C.: Designing the User Interface, 4th edn. Pearson Addison Wesley, London (2004)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lederer, S., Dey, A., Mankoff, J.: A Conceptual Model and Metaphor of Everyday Privacy in Ubiquitous Computing. Intel Research, Technical Report IRB-TR-02-017 (2002),
  27. 27.
    The Platform for Privacy Preferences 1.0 (P3P1.0) Specification. W3C Recommendation (April 16, 2002),
  28. 28.
    Chellappa, R.K., Sin, R.: Personalization versus Privacy: An Empirical Examination of the Online Consumer’s Dilemma. Information Technology and Management (forthcoming),
  29. 29.
    Hine, C., Eve, J.: Privacy in the Marketplace. The Information Society 14, 253–262 (1998), CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Culnan, M.J., Bies, R.J.: Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations. Journal of Social Issues 59, 323–353 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    CG&I-R: Privacy Policies Critical to Online Consumer Trust. Columbus Group and Ipsos-Reid, Canadian Inter@ctive Reid Report (2001)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Earp, J.B., Baumer, D.: Innovative Web Use to Learn About Consumer Behavior and Online Privacy. Communications of the ACM Archive 46, 81–83 (2003), CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Teo, H.H., Wan, W., Li, L.: Volunteering Personal Information on the Internet: Effects of Reputation, Privacy Initiatives, and Reward on Online Consumer Behavior. In: Proc. 37th Hawaii International Conf. on System Sciences, Big Island, HI (2004),

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information and Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineU.S.A
  2. 2.Institute of Information SystemsHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations