Skip to main content

Can the GDPR Allay Privacy Concerns Towards Smart Products? The Effect of a Compliance Seal on Perceived Data Security, Trust, and Intention to Use

  • 114 Accesses

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS,volume 13429)

Abstract

Smart consumer products are designed to provide their users with various benefits. To utilise smart products and enjoy their benefits, users usually have to provide some kind of information to the product and its manufacturer—often personal data. This can raise privacy and data security concerns and may hamper the use of smart products. The European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) addresses these concerns and provides requirements for an appropriate handling of data. Our study assumes that a positive perception of the GDPR can encourage smart product usage. Therefore, we explore the effect of a GDPR compliance seal that signals data security and trustworthiness. By means of an online experiment with 142 participants from Germany, we investigate the seal’s effect on perceived data security, perceived trust, and the intention to use a smart robot vacuum cleaner. The results indicate that a GDPR compliance seal indeed has a positive effect on perceived data security and, through perceived data security as a mediator, also on perceived trust. While the direct impact of a GDPR compliance seal on the intention to use a smart product lacks statistical significance, our model reveals an indirect effect via perceived data security and perceived trust as well as a positive total effect of the seal on intention to use.

Keywords

  • Smart products
  • GDPR seal
  • Trust
  • Privacy concerns
  • Data security

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-12673-4_6
  • Chapter length: 15 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-031-12673-4
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.

References

  1. Strategy Analytics: Global smart home market roaring back in 2021. https://news.strategyanalytics.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2021/Strategy-Analytics-Global-Smart-Home-Market-Roaring-Back-in-2021/default.aspx (2021)

  2. Wachter, S.: Normative challenges of identification in the internet of things: privacy, profiling, discrimination, and the GDPR. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 34, 436–449 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  3. Kowalczuk, P.: Consumer acceptance of smart speakers: a mixed methods approach. J. Res. Interact. Mark. 12, 418–431 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Kumar, V., Dixit, A., Javalgi, R.G., Dass, M.: Research framework, strategies, and applications of intelligent agent technologies (IATs) in marketing. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 44(1), 24–45 (2015)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Mani, Z., Chouk, I.: Drivers of consumers’ resistance to smart products. J. Mark. Manag. 33, 76–97 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Dominici, G., Roblek, V., Abbate, T., Tani, M.: Click and drive: consumer attitude to product development: towards future transformations of the driving experience. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 22, 420–434 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Wilson, C., Hargreaves, T., Hauxwell-Baldwin, R.: Benefits and risks of smart home technologies. Energy Policy 103, 72–83 (2017)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Badii, C., Bellini, P., Difino, A., Nesi, P.: Smart city IoT platform respecting GDPR privacy and security aspects. IEEE Access 8, 23601–23623 (2020)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Ogury LTD: GDPR one year on: survey findings show consumer awareness with data use is concerningly low. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gdpr-one-year-on-survey-findings-show-consumer-awareness-with-data-use-is-concerningly-low-300855176.html (2019)

  10. Proton Technologies AG: Do consumers know their GDPR data privacy rights? https://gdpr.eu/consumers-gdpr-data-privacy-rights/ (2019)

  11. Raff, S., Wentzel, D., Obwegeser, N.: Smart products: conceptual review, synthesis, and research directions. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 37, 379–404 (2020)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Doffman, Z.: Cyberattacks on IoT devices surge 300% in 2019, ‘measured in billions’, report claims. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/09/14/dangerous-cyberattacks-on-iot-devices-up-300-in-2019-now-rampant-report-claims/#8cf531a58926 (2019)

  13. Bugeja, J., Jacobsson, A., Davidsson, P.: On privacy and security challenges in smart connected homes. In: Proceedings of the 2016 European Intelligence and Security Informatics Conference (EISIC), pp. 172–175. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ho, G., Leung, D., Mishra, P., Hosseini, A., Song, D., Wagner, D.: Smart locks: lessons for securing commodity Internet of Things devices. In: Chen, X., Wang, X., Huang, X. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 461–472. ACM, New York, NY (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bilton, N.: Nest thermostat glitch leaves users in the cold. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/14/fashion/nest-thermostat-glitch-battery-dies-software-freeze.html (2016)

  16. Zheng, S., Apthorpe, N., Chetty, M., Feamster, N.: User perceptions of smart home IoT privacy. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2, 1–20 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Kumar, N., Madhuri, J., ChanneGowda, M.: Review on security and privacy concerns in Internet of Things. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on IoT and Application (ICIOT). IEEE (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Psychoula, I., Singh, D., Chen, L., Chen, F., Holzinger, A., Ning, H.: Users’ privacy concerns in IoT based applications. In: Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced & Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing & Communications, Cloud & Big Data Computing, Internet of People and Smart City Innovation Conference. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Oluwafemi, T., Kohno, T., Gupta, S., Patel, S.: Experimental security analyses of non-networked compact fluorescent lamps: a case study of home automation security. In: Proceedings of the Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results (LASER), pp. 13–24 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ronen, E., Shamir, A., Weingarten, A.-O., O’Flynn, C.: IoT goes nuclear: creating a ZigBee chain reaction. In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pp. 195–212. IEEE (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kostkova, P., et al.: Who owns the data? open data for healthcare. Front. Public Health 4, 7 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  22. Wilkowska, W., Ziefle, M., Himmel, S.: Perceptions of personal privacy in smart home technologies: do user assessments vary depending on the research method? In: Tryfonas, T., Askoxylakis, I. (eds.) HAS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9190, pp. 592–603. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20376-8_53

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Consumers International: Testing our trust: consumers and the Internet of Things 2017 review. https://www.consumersinternational.org/media/154746/iot2017review-2nded.pdf (2017)

  24. Greverie, F., Buvat, J., Nambiar, R., Appell, D., Bisht, A.: Securing the Internet of Things opportunity: putting cybersecurity at the heart of the IoT. https://www.capgemini.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/securing_the_internet_of_things_opportunity_putting_cyber_security_at_the_heart_of_the_iot.pdf (2014)

  25. de Hert, P., Papakonstantinou, V.: The new general data protection regulation: still a sound system for the protection of individuals? Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 32, 179–194 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Furey, E., Blue, J.: Can I trust her? Intelligent personal assistants and GDPR. In: Proceedings of the 2019 International Symposium on Networks, Computers and Communications (ISNCC), pp. 1–6. IEEE (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Fox, G., Tonge, C., Lynn, T., Mooney, J.: Communicating compliance: developing a GDPR privacy label. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-fourth Americas Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1–5 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Presthus, W., Sørum, H.: Consumer perspectives on information privacy following the implementation of the GDPR. Int. J. Inf. Syst. Proj. Manag. 7, 19–34 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Paul, C., Scheibe, K., Nilakanta, S.: Privacy concerns regarding wearable IoT devices: how it is influenced by GDPR? In: Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 4388–4397 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang, J., Hassandoust, F., Williams, J.E.: Online customer trust in the context of the general data protection regulation (GDPR). Pacific Asia J. Assoc. Informa. Syst. 12, 86–122 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Karampela, M., Ouhbi, S., Isomursu, M.: Exploring users’ willingness to share their health and personal data under the prism of the new GDPR: implications in healthcare. In: Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, vol. 2019, pp. 6509–6512 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Varkonyi, G.G., Kertesz, A., Varadi, S.: Privacy-awareness of users in our cloudy smart world. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Fog and Mobile Edge Computing (FMEC), pp. 189–196. IEEE (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rodrigues, R., Wright, D., Wadhwa, K.: Developing a privacy seal scheme (that works). Int. Data Priv. Law 3, 100–116 (2013)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  34. Johansen, J., Fischer-Hübner, S.: Making GDPR usable: a model to support usability evaluations of privacy. In: Friedewald, M., Önen, M., Lievens, E., Krenn, S., Fricker, S. (eds.) Privacy and Identity 2019. IAICT, vol. 576, pp. 275–291. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42504-3_18

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  35. Spence, M.: Job market signaling. Quart. J. Econ. 87, 355–374 (1977)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  36. Connelly, B.L., Certo, S.T., Ireland, R.D., Reutzel, C.R.: Signaling theory: a review and assessment. J. Manag. 37, 39–67 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Spence, M.: Signaling in retrospect and the informational structure of markets. Am. Econ. Rev. 92, 434–459 (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  38. Cook, L.: The role of third-party seals in building trust online. e-Serv. J. 2, 71–84 (2003)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  39. McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V., Kacmar, C.: Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: an integrative typology. Inf. Syst. Res. 13, 334–359 (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  40. McKnight, D.H., Kacmar, C.J., Choudhury, V.: Shifting factors and the ineffectiveness of third party assurance seals: a two-stage model of initial trust in a web business. Electron. Mark. 14, 252–266 (2004)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  41. Moores, T.: Do consumers understand the role of privacy seals in e-commerce? Commun. ACM 48, 86–91 (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  42. Johnson, S.D., Blythe, J.M., Manning, M., Wong, G.T.W.: The impact of IoT security labelling on consumer product choice and willingness to pay. PLoS ONE 15, e0227800 (2020)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  43. Emami-Naeini, P., Dheenadhayalan, J., Agarwal, Y., Cranor, L.F.: Which privacy and security attributes most impact consumers’ risk perception and willingness to purchase IoT devices? In: Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pp. 1937–1954. IEEE (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Rifon, N.J., LaRose, R., Choi, S.M.: Your privacy is sealed: effects of web privacy seals on trust and personal disclosures. J. Consum. Aff. 39, 339–362 (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  45. Shankar, V., Urban, G.L., Sultan, F.: Online trust: a stakeholder perspective, concepts, implications, and future directions. J. Strat. Inf. Syst. 11, 325–344 (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  46. Walker, K.L.: Surrendering information through the looking glass: transparency, trust, and protection. J. Public Policy Mark. 35, 144–158 (2016)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  47. Coughlan, T., Brown, M., Mortier, R., Houghton, R.J., Goulden, M., Lawson, G.: Exploring acceptance and consequences of the Internet of Things in the home. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Green Computing and Communications, pp. 148–155. IEEE (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Princi, E., Krämer, N.: I spy with my little sensor eye: effect of data-tracking and convenience on the intention to use smart technology. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lu, H.-P., Hsu, C.-L., Hsu, H.-Y.: An empirical study of the effect of perceived risk upon intention to use online applications. Inf. Manag. Comput. Secur. 13, 106–120 (2005)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  50. Kim, D.J., Ferrin, D.L., Rao, H.R.: A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: the role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents. Decis. Support Syst. 44, 544–564 (2008)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  51. Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., Schoorman, F.D.: An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad. Manag. Rev. 20, 709–734 (1995)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  52. Bhattacherjee, A.: Individual trust in online firms: scale development and initial test. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 19, 211–241 (2002)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  53. Obar, J.A., Oeldorf-Hirsch, A.: The biggest lie on the Internet: ignoring the privacy policies and terms of service policies of social networking services. Inf. Commun. Soc. 23, 128–147 (2020)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  54. heyData GmbH: Europe in the data protection ranking. https://en.heydata.eu/europa-im-datenschutz-ranking (2021)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oliver Michler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

Table 1.

Table 1. Questionnaire items for measuring intention to use, perceived data security, and trust.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Michler, O., Stummer, C., Decker, R. (2022). Can the GDPR Allay Privacy Concerns Towards Smart Products? The Effect of a Compliance Seal on Perceived Data Security, Trust, and Intention to Use. In: Kő, A., Francesconi, E., Kotsis, G., Tjoa, A.M., Khalil, I. (eds) Electronic Government and the Information Systems Perspective. EGOVIS 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13429. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12673-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12673-4_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-12672-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-12673-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)