Skip to main content

The Surveillance Society: Which Factors Form Public Acceptance of Surveillance Technologies?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 738))

Abstract

Currently, surveillance technologies are increasingly used to give people a sense of safety in medical as well as crime surveillance contexts. On the one hand, perceived safety can be supported by adequate surveillance technologies (e.g., cameras), however, the systematic use of surveillance technologies undermines individual privacy needs on the other hand. In this empirical study, we explore users’ perceptions on safety and privacy in the context of surveillance systems. In order to understand if the acceptance of surveillance depends on usage contexts, surveillance technologies in the urban were compared to the medical context. Using an online survey, 119 users were requested to indicate their acceptance regarding different types of surveillance contexts and technologies, differentiating perceived benefits and barriers as well as safety and privacy needs. We investigate acceptance differences towards surveillance technologies at various locations (private and public) as well. In this paper, we especially explore the impact of different surveillance contexts, locations and individual perceived crime threat on the acceptance of surveillance technologies and on the needs for privacy and safety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ziefle, M., Schneider, C., Valeé, D., Schnettler, A., Krempels K.-H., Jarke, M.: Urban Future Outline (UFO): a roadmap on research for livable cities. ERCIM News 98 (2014). http://ercim-news.ercim.eu/en98/keynote-smart-cities

  2. La Vigne, N.G., Lowry, S.S., Markman, J.A., Dwyer, A.M.: Evaluating the Use of Public Surveillance Cameras for Crime Control and Prevention. Final Technical Report. The Urban Institute, Washington, DC (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Whitaker, R.: The End of Privacy: How Total Surveillance is Becoming a Reality. The New Press, New York (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ziefle, M., Wilkowska, W.: What makes people change their preferences in public transportation – opinions in different user groups. In: Giaffreda, R., Cagáňová, D., Li, Y., Riggio, R., Voisard, A. (eds.) IoT360 2014. LNICST, vol. 151, pp. 137–143. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19743-2_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Plouffe, L., Kalache, A.: Towards global age- friendly cities: determining urban features that promote active aging. J. Urban Health 87(5), 733–739 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Leonhardt, S.: Personal healthcare devices. In: Mekherjee, S., et al. (eds.) AmIware: Hardware Technology Drivers of Ambient Intelligence, pp. 349–370. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Klack, L., Möllering, C., Ziefle, M., Schmitz-Rode, T.: Future care floor: a sensitive floor for movement monitoring and fall detection in home environments. In: Lin, J.C., Nikita, K.S. (eds.) MobiHealth 2010. LNICST, vol. 55, pp. 211–218. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20865-2_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Klack, L., Schmitz-Rode, T., Wilkowska, W., Kasugai, K., Heidrich, F., Ziefle, M.: Integrated home monitoring and compliance optimization for patients with mechanical circulatory support devices (MCSDs). Ann. Biomed. Eng. 39(12), 2911–2921 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith, M.J., Clarke, R.V.: Crime and public transport. Crime Justice 27, 169–233 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Marshall, R.D., Bryant, R.A., Amsel, L., Suh, E.J., Cook, J.M., Neria, Y.: The psychology of ongoing threat: relative risk appraisal, the September 11 attacks, and terrorism-related fears. Am. Psychol. 62(4), 304 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Baumer, T.L.: Research on fear of crime in the US. Victimology 3, 254–264 (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Loewen, L.J., Steel, G.D., Suedfeld, P.: Perceived safety from crime in the urban environment. J. Environ. Psychol. 13(4), 323–331 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Isnard, A.: Can surveillance cameras be successful in preventing crime and controlling anti-social behaviours? In: Proceedings of the Character, Impact and Prevention of Crime in Regional Australia Conference, Townsville, Australia, 2–3 August 2001

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wiecek, C., Saetnan, A.R.: Restrictive? Permissive? The Contradictory Framing of Video Surveillance in Norway and Denmark. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Working Paper 4 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sheldon, B.: Camera surveillance within the UK: enhancing public safety or a social threat? Int. Rev. Law Comput. Tech. 25(3), 193–203 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chattopadhyayr, D., Dasgupta, R., Banerjee, E.R., Chakraborty, A.: Event driven video surveillance system using city cloud. In: Proceedings of the first International Conference on Intelligent Infrastructure at the 47th Annual National Convention Computer Society of India (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Song, M., Tao, D., Maybank, S.J.: Sparse Camera Network for Visual Surveillance – A Comprehensive Survey. Cornell University (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lewis, D.A., Maxfield, M.G.: Fear in the neighborhoods: an investigation of the impact of crime. J. Res. Crime Delinq. 17(2), 160–189 (1980)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Blöbaum, A., Hunecke, M.: Perceived danger in urban public space: the impacts of physical features and personal factors. Environ. Behav. 37(4), 465–486 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gumpert, G., Drucker, S.J.: Public boundaries: Privacy and surveillance in a technological world. Commun. Q. 49(2), 115–129 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Arning, K., Kowalewski, S., Ziefle, M.: Modelling user acceptance of wireless medical technologies. Wirel. Mobile Commun. Healthcare 61, 146–153 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Arning, K., Ziefle, M., Muehlhans, H.: Join the ride! user requirements and interface design guidelines for a commuter carpooling platform. In: Marcus, A. (ed.) DUXU 2013. LNCS, vol. 8014, pp. 10–19. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39238-2_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Alsnih, R., Hensher, D.A.: The mobility and accessibility expectations of seniors in an aging population. Transp. Res. Part A. Policy Pract. 37(10), 903–916 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Dickerson, A.E., Molnar, L.J., Eby, D.W., Adler, G., Bédard, M., Berg-Weger, M., Trujillo, L.: Transportation and aging: a research agenda for advancing safe mobility. Gerontologist 47(5), 578–590 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Covington, J., Taylor, R.B.: Fear of crime in urban residential neighborhoods. Sociol. Q. 32(2), 231–249 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Scarborough, B.K., Like-Haislip, T.Z., Novak, K.J., Lucas, W.L., Alarid, L.F.: Assessing the relationship between individual characteristics, neighborhood context, and fear of crime. J. Crim. Justice 38(4), 819–826 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Heek, J., Arning, K., Ziefle, M.: Safety and privacy perceptions in public spaces: an empirical study on user requirements for city mobility. In: Giaffreda, R., Cagáňová, D., Li, Y., Riggio, R., Voisard, A. (eds.) IoT360 2014. LNICST, vol. 151, pp. 97–103. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19743-2_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Kientz, J.A., Arriaga, R.I., Chetty, M., Hayes, G.R., Richardson, J., Patel, S.N., Abowd, G.D.: Grow and know: understanding record-keeping needs for tracking the development of young children. In: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1351–1360. ACM, NY (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Himmel, S., Ziefle, M., Arning, K.: From living space to urban quarter: acceptance of ICT monitoring solutions in an ageing society. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCI 2013. LNCS, vol. 8006, pp. 49–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39265-8_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. World Health Organization. Ageing & Life Course Unit: WHO global report on falls prevention in older age. World Health Organization (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lord, S.R., Menz, H.B., Sherrington, C.: Home environment risk factors for falls in older people and the efficacy of home modifications. Age Ageing 35(2), 55–59 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Koskela, H.: ‘The gaze without eyes’: video-surveillance and the changing nature of urban space. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 24(2), 243–265 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Patton, J.W.: Protecting privacy in public? Surveillance technologies and the value of public places. Ethics Inf. Technol. 2(3), 181–187 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Debatin, B., Lovejoy, J.P., Horn, A.-K., Hughes, B.N.: Facebook and online privacy: attitudes, behaviours, and unintended consequences. J. Comput. Mediat. Comm. 15(1), 83–108 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Marx, G.T.: Ethics for the new surveillance. Inform. Soc. 14(3), 171–185 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Mark, W.: Fear of victimization: why are women and the elderly more afraid? Soc. Sci. Q. 65(3), 681–702 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  37. van Heek, J., Arning, K., Ziefle, M.: How fear of crime affects needs for privacy safety - Acceptance of Surveillance Technologies in Smart Cities. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems (SMARTGREENS 2016), pp. 32–43 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia van Heek .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

van Heek, J., Arning, K., Ziefle, M. (2017). The Surveillance Society: Which Factors Form Public Acceptance of Surveillance Technologies?. In: Helfert, M., Klein, C., Donnellan, B., Gusikhin, O. (eds) Smart Cities, Green Technologies, and Intelligent Transport Systems. VEHITS SMARTGREENS 2016 2016. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 738. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63712-9_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63712-9_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63711-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63712-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics