Julia Helena Zhang , Timo Koivumäki , Dominic Chalmers
{"title":"Privacy vs convenience: Understanding intention-behavior divergence post-GDPR","authors":"Julia Helena Zhang , Timo Koivumäki , 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.
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.