Privacy Online pp 143-156 | Cite as

The Uses of Privacy Online: Trading a Loss of Privacy for Social Web Gratifications?



According to Etzioni (1999), the first step in analyzing privacy is to determine whether or not there is a problem. Given the easy availability of private information on the Internet and the seemingly great readiness of Social Web users to disclose personal data, it would appear that the protection of privacy is not a major problem for users. However, empirical evidence demonstrates that Social Web users are in fact quite concerned about their privacy (Barnes 2006; Tufekci 2008; Debatin et al. 2009).


  1. Acquisti A, Gross R (2006) Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. Presentation on the 6th Workshop Privacy Enhancing Technologies, Cambridge, 28–30 June 2006Google Scholar
  2. Altman I (1975) The environment and social behavior. Privacy, personal space, territory, crowding. Brooks/Cole, MontereyGoogle Scholar
  3. Altman I (1977) Privacy regulation: culturally universal or culturally specific? J Soc Issues 33:67–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Altman I, Taylor DA (1973) Social penetration: the development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Ancu M, Cozma R (2009) MySpace politics: uses and gratifications of befriending candidates. J Broadcast Electron 53:567–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Awad NF, Krishnan MS (2006) The personalization privacy paradox: an empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Quart 30(1):13–28Google Scholar
  7. Barnes S (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9).
  8. boyd dm (2007) Why youth (heart) social network sites: the role of networked publics in teenage social life. In: Buckingham D (ed) Macarthur foundation series on digital learning – youth, identity, and digital. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 119–142Google Scholar
  9. boyd dm, Ellison NB (2008) Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. J Comput Mediat Commun 13:210–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. boyd dm, Hargittai E (2010) Facebook privacy settings: who cares? First Monday 15.
  11. Burgoon JK, Parrott R, LePoire BA, Kelley DL, Walther JB, Perry D (1989) Maintaining and restoring privacy through communication in different types of relationship. J Soc Pers Relat 6:131–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Debatin B, Lovejoy JP, Horn A-K, Hughes BN (2009) Facebook and online privacy: attitudes, behaviors, and unintended consequences. J Comput Mediat Commun 15:83–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duval S, Wicklund RA (1972) A theory of objective self-awareness. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Ekdale B, Namkoong K, Fung TKF, Perlmutter DD (2010) Why blog? (then and now): exploring the motivations for blogging by popular American political bloggers. New Med Soc 12:217–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elliott P (1974) Uses and gratifications research: a critique and a sociological alternative. In: Rosengren KE, Wenner LA, Palmgreen P (eds) Media gratifications research. Current perspectives. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 249–268Google Scholar
  16. Ellison N, Heino R, Gibbs J (2006) Managing impressions online: self presentation processes in the online dating environment. J Comput Mediat Commun 11(2):415–441 (Article 2)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Etzioni A (1999) The limits of privacy. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Fried C (1984) Privacy: a moral analysis. In: Schoeman FD (ed) Philosophical dimensions of privacy: an anthology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 371–377 (Reprinted from Yale Law Journal, 1968)Google Scholar
  19. Gavison R (1984) Privacy and the limits of law. In: Schoeman FD (ed) Philosophical dimensions of privacy: an anthology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 421–471 (Reprinted from Yale Law Journal, 1980, 89)Google Scholar
  20. Gerstein RS (1984) Intimacy and privacy. In: Schoeman FD (ed) Philosophical dimensions of privacy: an anthology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 265–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haridakis P, Hanson P (2009) Social interaction and co-viewing with youtube: blending mass communication reception and social connection. J Broadcast Electron 53:317–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Herzog H (1944) What do we really know about daytime serial listeners? In: Lazarsfeld PF, Stanton FN (eds) Radio research 1942–1943. Duell, Sloan & Pearce, New York, pp 3–33Google Scholar
  23. Hixson WL (1987) Privacy in public society: human rights in conflict. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Joinson AN (2001) Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: the role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. Eur J Soc Psychol 31:177–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Katz E, Foulkes D (1962) On the use of the mass media as “Escape”: clarification of a concept. Public Opin Q 26:377–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Katz E, Blumler JG, Gurevitch M (1974) Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In: Blumler JG, Kath E (eds) The uses of mass communication, Current perspectives on gratifications research. Sage, Beverly Hills/London, pp 19–32Google Scholar
  27. Krämer NC, Winter S (2008) Impression management 2.0: the relationship of self-esteem, extraversion, self-efficacy, and self-presentation within social networking sites. J Med Psychol 20(3):106–116Google Scholar
  28. Lampe C, Ellison NB, Steinfield C (2007) A familiar face(book): profile elements as signals in an online social network. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, New York, pp 435–444Google Scholar
  29. Laurenceau J-P, Feldman Barrett L, Pietromonaco PR (1998) Intimacy as an interpersonal process: the importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. J Pers Soc Psychol 74:1238–1251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee JK (2006) Who are blog users? Profiling blog users by media use and political involvement. Paper presented at ICA conference in Dresden, Germany.
  31. Leung L (2009) User-generated content on the internet: an examination of gratifications, civic engagement and psychological empowerment. New Med Soc 11:1327–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lin CA (1996) Looking back: the contribution of Blumler and Katz’s uses of mass communication to communication research. J Broadcast Electronic 40:574–581Google Scholar
  33. Liu S-H, Liao H-L, Zeng Y-T (2007) Why people blog: an expectancy theory analysis. Issues Inform Syst 8:232–237Google Scholar
  34. Matheson K, Zanna MP (1989) Persuasion as a function of self-awareness in computer-mediated communication. Soc Behav 4:99–111Google Scholar
  35. Nardi B, Schiano D, Gumbrecht M (2004) Blogging as social activity or would you let 900 million people read your diary? In: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, Chicago, pp 222–231. Accessed 8 Dec 2010
  36. Newell PB (1994) A systems model of privacy. J Environ Psychol 14:65–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Newell PB (1995) Perspectives on privacy. J Environ Psychol 15:87–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Newhagen JE, Rafaeli S (1996) Why communication researchers should study the internet: a dialogue. J Commun 46:4–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Norberg P, Horne DR, Horne DR (2007) The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. J Consum Aff 41(1):100–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nov O (2007) What motivates Wikipedians, or how to increase user-generated content contribution. Commun ACM 50:60–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Paine C, Reips U-D, Stieger S, Joinson A, Buchanan T (2006) Internet users’ perceptions of ‘privacy concerns’ and ‘privacy actions’. Int J Hum Comput St 65:526–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Palmgreen P, Wenner LA, Rosengren KE (1985) Uses and gratifications research: the past ten years. In: Rosengren KE, Wenner LA, Palmgreen P (eds) Media gratifications research, Current perspectives. Sage, Beverly Hills, pp 11–37Google Scholar
  43. Parent W (1983) Privacy, morality and the law. Philos Pub Aff 12:269–288Google Scholar
  44. Pastalan LA (1975) Privacy preferences among relocated institutionalised elderly. In: Carson DH (ed) Man-environment interactions, vol 2. Hutchinson & Ross, Stroudsburg, pp 73–82Google Scholar
  45. Pedersen DM (1997) Psychological functions of privacy. J Environ Psychol 17:147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rafaeli S, Ariel Y (2008) Online motivational factors: incentives for participation and contribution in wikipedia. In: Barak A (ed) Psychological aspects of cyberspace: theory, research, applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 243–267Google Scholar
  47. Rubin AM (1979) Television use by children and adolescents. Hum Commun Res 5:109–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rubin AM (2002) The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In: Bryant J, Zillmann D (eds) Media effects. Advances in theory and research. Erlbaum, Mahwah/London, pp 525–548Google Scholar
  49. Rubin AM (2009) Uses-and-gratifications perspective on media effects. In: Bryant J, Oliver MB (eds) Media effects. Advances in theory and research, 3rd edn. Routledge, New York, pp 165–184Google Scholar
  50. Ruggerio TE (2000) Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Commun Soc 3:3–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shao G (2008) Understanding the appeal of user-generated media: a uses and gratifications perspective. Internet Res 19:7–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schoeman F (1984) Privacy and intimate information. In: Schoeman F (ed) Philosophical dimensions of privacy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 403–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sproull L, Kiesler S (1986) Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Manage Sci 32:1492–1512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sproull L, Kiesler S (1991) Two-level perspective on electronic mail in organizations. J Org Comp Elect Com 1:125–134Google Scholar
  55. Suler JL (2004) The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychol Behav 7(3):321–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Swanson DL (1977) The uses and misuses of uses and gratifications. Hum Commun Res 3:214–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Taddicken M (2008) Methodeneffekte bei web-befragungen: einschränkungen der datengüte durch ein ‘reduziertes kommunikationsmedium’? [Mode effects of Web surveys: Limitation of data quality because of a ‚reduced communication mode’?]. Halem, KölnGoogle Scholar
  58. Tidwell LC, Walther JB (2002) Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: getting to know one another a bit at a time. Hum Commun Res 28:317–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tufekci Z (2008) Can you see me now? audience and disclosure regulation in online social network sites. B Sci Technol Soc 28:20–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Warren SD, Brandeis LD (1890) The right to privacy. Harv Law Rev 4:193–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Westin A (1967) Privacy and freedom. Atheneum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  62. Wheeless LR (1976) Self-disclosure and interpersonal solidarity: measurement, validation, and relationships. Hum Commun Res 3:47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wheeless LR, Grotz J (1976) Conceptualization and measurement of reported self-disclosure. Hum Commun Res 2:338–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HamburgHamburgGermany
  2. 2.University of HohenheimStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations