Is everything under control? An experimental study on how control over data influences trust in and support for major governmental data exchange projects

Inf. Polity Pub Date : 2022-03-14 DOI:10.3233/ip-220049
Bjorn Kleizen, W. Dooren
{"title":"Is everything under control? An experimental study on how control over data influences trust in and support for major governmental data exchange projects","authors":"Bjorn Kleizen, W. Dooren","doi":"10.3233/ip-220049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The steep rise in the exchange of (citizen) data through government-wide platforms has triggered a demand for better privacy safeguards. One approach to privacy is to give citizens control over the exchange of personal data, hoping to reinforce trust in and support for data-driven governance. However, it remains unclear whether more control fulfils its promise of more support and higher trust. Using an online survey experiment, we study how 1) textual information on control and 2) direct control (simulated through an exercise in which respondents choose data types that can be shared) affect citizen trust, support and policy concerns. Results suggest that a combination of information on and direct control result in relatively high levels of trust, support and policy concern. Moreover, we observe an interaction effect in which those respondents with low pre-existing trust in government report more positive attitudes when assigned to the full intervention (information on control + direct control) group. Our results imply that perceived control may be especially useful to mitigate negative attitudes of those who have low trust in government.","PeriodicalId":418875,"journal":{"name":"Inf. Polity","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inf. Polity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-220049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The steep rise in the exchange of (citizen) data through government-wide platforms has triggered a demand for better privacy safeguards. One approach to privacy is to give citizens control over the exchange of personal data, hoping to reinforce trust in and support for data-driven governance. However, it remains unclear whether more control fulfils its promise of more support and higher trust. Using an online survey experiment, we study how 1) textual information on control and 2) direct control (simulated through an exercise in which respondents choose data types that can be shared) affect citizen trust, support and policy concerns. Results suggest that a combination of information on and direct control result in relatively high levels of trust, support and policy concern. Moreover, we observe an interaction effect in which those respondents with low pre-existing trust in government report more positive attitudes when assigned to the full intervention (information on control + direct control) group. Our results imply that perceived control may be especially useful to mitigate negative attitudes of those who have low trust in government.
一切都在掌控之中吗?对数据的控制如何影响对主要政府数据交换项目的信任和支持的实验研究
通过政府平台交换(公民)数据的急剧增加引发了对更好的隐私保护的需求。保护隐私的一种方法是让公民控制个人数据的交换,希望加强对数据驱动型治理的信任和支持。然而,目前尚不清楚更多的控制是否能兑现更多支持和更高信任的承诺。通过一项在线调查实验,我们研究了1)控制的文本信息和2)直接控制(通过受访者选择可共享的数据类型的练习模拟)如何影响公民的信任、支持和政策关注。结果表明,信息和直接控制相结合会产生相对较高的信任、支持和政策关注。此外,我们观察到一种互动效应,即当被分配到完全干预(控制信息+直接控制)组时,对政府先前存在信任较低的被调查者表现出更积极的态度。我们的研究结果表明,感知控制可能特别有助于减轻那些对政府信任度较低的人的负面态度。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信