“I Agree”: The Effects of Embedding Terms of Service Key Points in Online User Registration Form

  • Matjaž Kljun
  • Jernej Vičič
  • Klen Čopič Pucihar
  • Branko Kavšek
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9297)


Terms of service (ToS) are becoming an ubiquitous part of online account creation. There is a general understanding that users rarely read them and do not particularly care about binding themselves into legally enforceable contracts with online service providers. Some services are trying to change this trend with presenting ToS section as key points on a ToS dedicated page. However, little is known how would such presentation of key points affect the continuation of user registration at the time of account creation. This paper provides an exploratory study in this area. We have offered users to participate in a draft for a prize in exchange for their names and email addresses. For this purpose we have created three registration forms: a standard form with ToS hiding behind a hyperlink and two with ToS key points presented at the time of account creation with different engagement requirements. Initial results suggest that ToS key points presented just as a list at the time of account creation is no more engaging than a form with ToS hidden behind a link. More text even made several users to complete the registration quicker than the users with the standard form. Moreover, different designs of the ToS key points list requiring different user engagement affect the interaction and reading of ToS key points, but the actual time spent on ToS is very low.


Terms of service Terms and condition Privacy policy 


  1. 1.
    AskReddit (banjomatic): People who read through the Terms & Conditions, did you ever find anything to stop you from accepting.
  2. 2.
    Bayley, E.: The Clicks That Bind: Ways Users ‘Agree’ to Online Terms of Service. Electronic Frontier Foundation (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fiesler, C., Bruckman, A.: Copyright terms in online creative communities. In: CHI EA 2014, pp. 2551–2556. ACM, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liccardi, I., et al.: No technical understanding required: Helping users make informed choices about access to their personal data. In: MOBIQUITOUS 2014, pp. 140–150. ICST, Brussels, Belgium (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luger, E., et al.: Consent for all: revealing the hidden complexity of terms and conditions. In: CHI 2013, p. 2687. ACM, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McDonald, A.M., Cranor, L.F.: The cost of reading privacy policies. A J. Law Policy Inf. Soc. 543(4), 1–22 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Tsai, J.Y., et al.: The effect of online privacy information on purchasing behavior: An experimental study. Inf. Syst. Res. 22(2), 254–268 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    UXmovement (anthony): Why Every Terms of Service Page Needs Summaries.
  10. 10.
    Waters, D.: Good and poor practices in Key Features Documents. The Financial Conduct Authority (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matjaž Kljun
    • 1
  • Jernej Vičič
    • 1
  • Klen Čopič Pucihar
    • 1
  • Branko Kavšek
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Information TechnologiesUniversity of PrimorskaKoperSlovenia

Personalised recommendations