an article by Mark Warner (University College London, UK) and Victoria Wang (University of Portsmouth, UK) published in Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society Volume 17 Issue 4 (2019)
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to investigate behavioural changes related to self-censorship (SC) in social networking sites (SNSs) as new methods of online surveillance are introduced. In particular, it examines the relationships between SC and four related factors: privacy concerns (PC), privacy awareness (PA), perceived vulnerability (PV) and information management (IM).
Design/methodology/approach
A national wide survey was conducted in the UK (N = 519). The data were analysed to present both descriptive and inferential statistical findings.
Findings
The level of online SC increases as the level of privacy concern increases. The level of privacy concern increases as the levels of PA and PV increase and the level of effective IM decreases.
Originality/value
This study extends the literature on online SC, showing that PCs increase the level of SC in SNSs. It provides support for three antecedent factors to PC which impact upon levels of SC when communicating in SNSs.
Showing posts with label privacy_concerns. Show all posts
Showing posts with label privacy_concerns. Show all posts
Friday, 6 December 2019
Friday, 14 June 2019
Spiraling downward: The reciprocal relation between attitude toward political behavioral targeting and privacy concerns
an article by Tom Dobber, Damian Trilling, Natali Helberger and Claes de Vreese (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands) published in New Media & Society Volume 21 Issue 6 (June 2019)
Abstract
Tailored political messages are increasingly prevalent in election time, but we know little about how people perceive such data-driven and potentially privacy-infringing techniques.
This article examines how demographics relate to privacy concerns and attitudes toward “political behavioral targeting” (PBT), how privacy concerns and attitudes toward PBT relate over time, and explore their relation with autonomy, electoral deliberation, and chilling effects.
Using a three-wave panel study, administered in the Netherlands (N = 879), we examine a potential reciprocal relation between attitude toward PBT and privacy concerns, which may form a negative reinforcing spiral dynamic over time. This dynamic could result in undesirable behavior of the voter from a democratic viewpoint (e.g. chilling effects).
We find that demographics fall short in explaining privacy concerns.
More importantly, we find evidence for a reinforcing spiral dynamic and, by doing so, contribute to the discussion about the threats and promises of PBT to society.
Full text (PDF 20pp)
<hr />
Abstract
Tailored political messages are increasingly prevalent in election time, but we know little about how people perceive such data-driven and potentially privacy-infringing techniques.
This article examines how demographics relate to privacy concerns and attitudes toward “political behavioral targeting” (PBT), how privacy concerns and attitudes toward PBT relate over time, and explore their relation with autonomy, electoral deliberation, and chilling effects.
Using a three-wave panel study, administered in the Netherlands (N = 879), we examine a potential reciprocal relation between attitude toward PBT and privacy concerns, which may form a negative reinforcing spiral dynamic over time. This dynamic could result in undesirable behavior of the voter from a democratic viewpoint (e.g. chilling effects).
We find that demographics fall short in explaining privacy concerns.
More importantly, we find evidence for a reinforcing spiral dynamic and, by doing so, contribute to the discussion about the threats and promises of PBT to society.
Full text (PDF 20pp)
<hr />
Saturday, 5 November 2016
Privacy concerns in smart cities
an article by Liesbet van Zoonen (Erasmus University Rotterdam, Netherlands) published in Government Information Quarterly
Volume 33 Issue 3 (July 2016)
Highlights
• Discussion of arguments for including people’s privacy concerns in research, policy and design of smart cities.
• Thorough review of current research about people’s privacy concerns and the paradoxes that typify them.
• People’s concerns are shown as structured by how they perceive city data, and for which purpose they feel this data is used.
• Framework to assess if and how specific technologies and data-usage in smart cities will evoke people’s privacy concerns.
• Clear directions for further academic research about people’s privacy concerns in smart cities.
• Sensitizing instrument for policymakers and operational managers about privacy concerns among their citizens.
Abstract
In this paper a framework is constructed to hypothesize if and how smart city technologies and urban big data produce privacy concerns among the people in these cities (as inhabitants, workers, visitors, and otherwise). The framework is built on the basis of two recurring dimensions in research about people's concerns about privacy: one dimensions represents that people perceive particular data as more personal and sensitive than others, the other dimension represents that people's privacy concerns differ according to the purpose for which data is collected, with the contrast between service and surveillance purposes most paramount.
These two dimensions produce a 2 × 2 framework that hypothesizes which technologies and data-applications in smart cities are likely to raise people's privacy concerns, distinguishing between raising hardly any concern (impersonal data, service purpose), to raising controversy (personal data, surveillance purpose).
Specific examples from the city of Rotterdam are used to further explore and illustrate the academic and practical usefulness of the framework. It is argued that the general hypothesis of the framework offers clear directions for further empirical research and theory building about privacy concerns in smart cities, and that it provides a sensitizing instrument for local governments to identify the absence, presence, or emergence of privacy concerns among their citizens.
Full text
Highlights
• Discussion of arguments for including people’s privacy concerns in research, policy and design of smart cities.
• Thorough review of current research about people’s privacy concerns and the paradoxes that typify them.
• People’s concerns are shown as structured by how they perceive city data, and for which purpose they feel this data is used.
• Framework to assess if and how specific technologies and data-usage in smart cities will evoke people’s privacy concerns.
• Clear directions for further academic research about people’s privacy concerns in smart cities.
• Sensitizing instrument for policymakers and operational managers about privacy concerns among their citizens.
Abstract
In this paper a framework is constructed to hypothesize if and how smart city technologies and urban big data produce privacy concerns among the people in these cities (as inhabitants, workers, visitors, and otherwise). The framework is built on the basis of two recurring dimensions in research about people's concerns about privacy: one dimensions represents that people perceive particular data as more personal and sensitive than others, the other dimension represents that people's privacy concerns differ according to the purpose for which data is collected, with the contrast between service and surveillance purposes most paramount.
These two dimensions produce a 2 × 2 framework that hypothesizes which technologies and data-applications in smart cities are likely to raise people's privacy concerns, distinguishing between raising hardly any concern (impersonal data, service purpose), to raising controversy (personal data, surveillance purpose).
Specific examples from the city of Rotterdam are used to further explore and illustrate the academic and practical usefulness of the framework. It is argued that the general hypothesis of the framework offers clear directions for further empirical research and theory building about privacy concerns in smart cities, and that it provides a sensitizing instrument for local governments to identify the absence, presence, or emergence of privacy concerns among their citizens.
Full text
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
