Privacy vs convenience: Understanding intention-behavior divergence post-GDPR

IF 9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Computers in Human Behavior Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2024.108382
Julia Helena Zhang , Timo Koivumäki , Dominic Chalmers
{"title":"Privacy vs convenience: Understanding intention-behavior divergence post-GDPR","authors":"Julia Helena Zhang ,&nbsp;Timo Koivumäki ,&nbsp;Dominic Chalmers","doi":"10.1016/j.chb.2024.108382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The privacy paradox describes a scenario in which individuals express privacy concerns but still share private data online. We explore how the paradox can be understood following the introduction of the European Union's landmark GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) legislation. Through qualitative interviews with online platform users, we find that individuals are concerned about personal data but remain constrained in their privacy self-management. In this context of limited perceived control, users' privacy attitudes are guided by anticipated value from using the platform and the convenience of privacy protection measures. Our study also highlights the role of peer influence on users' privacy choices, specifically through micro- and macro-network effects. We identify that (1) users move to privacy-protecting platforms to align with their social network, or because of information disseminated within their networks; and (2) users remain on platforms offering minimal privacy protection despite privacy concerns due to presence of their entire peer network. These findings provide a unified view on Privacy Paradox post-GDPR, bringing together a more comprehensive range of influences on individual-level privacy dynamics. Our research underscores the need for policymakers to streamline and standardize data protection measures lest the intentions of GDPR be undermined. We also highlight the need to go beyond a reliance on privacy self-management by better regulating the architecture of data management and enforcing principles of privacy by design and default.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48471,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior","volume":"160 ","pages":"Article 108382"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563224002504/pdfft?md5=0710439312889a65ce9b24bf29c0ea35&pid=1-s2.0-S0747563224002504-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563224002504","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The privacy paradox describes a scenario in which individuals express privacy concerns but still share private data online. We explore how the paradox can be understood following the introduction of the European Union's landmark GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) legislation. Through qualitative interviews with online platform users, we find that individuals are concerned about personal data but remain constrained in their privacy self-management. In this context of limited perceived control, users' privacy attitudes are guided by anticipated value from using the platform and the convenience of privacy protection measures. Our study also highlights the role of peer influence on users' privacy choices, specifically through micro- and macro-network effects. We identify that (1) users move to privacy-protecting platforms to align with their social network, or because of information disseminated within their networks; and (2) users remain on platforms offering minimal privacy protection despite privacy concerns due to presence of their entire peer network. These findings provide a unified view on Privacy Paradox post-GDPR, bringing together a more comprehensive range of influences on individual-level privacy dynamics. Our research underscores the need for policymakers to streamline and standardize data protection measures lest the intentions of GDPR be undermined. We also highlight the need to go beyond a reliance on privacy self-management by better regulating the architecture of data management and enforcing principles of privacy by design and default.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
隐私与便利:了解《个人信息保护条例》颁布后意向与行为之间的差异
隐私悖论描述了这样一种情景:个人表达了对隐私的担忧,但仍然在网上分享私人数据。我们探讨了在欧盟推出具有里程碑意义的 GDPR(《通用数据保护条例》)立法后,如何理解这一悖论。通过对网络平台用户的定性访谈,我们发现个人对个人数据十分关注,但在隐私自我管理方面仍然受到限制。在这种感知控制有限的情况下,用户的隐私态度受到使用平台的预期价值和隐私保护措施便利性的引导。我们的研究还强调了同伴影响对用户隐私选择的作用,特别是通过微观和宏观网络效应。我们发现:(1) 用户转移到隐私保护平台是为了与他们的社交网络保持一致,或者是因为在他们的网络中传播的信息;(2) 由于整个同伴网络的存在,用户尽管有隐私方面的顾虑,但仍会留在提供最低隐私保护的平台上。这些发现为《隐私权保护条例》颁布后的隐私悖论提供了一个统一的视角,汇集了对个人层面隐私动态的更全面的影响因素。我们的研究强调,政策制定者需要简化数据保护措施并使之标准化,以免 GDPR 的初衷遭到破坏。我们还强调,有必要超越对隐私自我管理的依赖,更好地规范数据管理架构,通过设计和默认方式执行隐私原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
381
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: Computers in Human Behavior is a scholarly journal that explores the psychological aspects of computer use. It covers original theoretical works, research reports, literature reviews, and software and book reviews. The journal examines both the use of computers in psychology, psychiatry, and related fields, and the psychological impact of computer use on individuals, groups, and society. Articles discuss topics such as professional practice, training, research, human development, learning, cognition, personality, and social interactions. It focuses on human interactions with computers, considering the computer as a medium through which human behaviors are shaped and expressed. Professionals interested in the psychological aspects of computer use will find this journal valuable, even with limited knowledge of computers.
期刊最新文献
What makes an app authentic? Determining antecedents of perceived authenticity in an AI-powered service app The effects of self-explanation on game-based learning: Evidence from eye-tracking analyses Avatars at risk: Exploring public response to sexual violence in immersive digital spaces Perception of non-binary social media users towards authentic non-binary social media influencers Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1