隐私和社交网络:关注是意图和行为的有效指标吗?

T. Hughes-Roberts
{"title":"隐私和社交网络:关注是意图和行为的有效指标吗?","authors":"T. Hughes-Roberts","doi":"10.1109/SocialCom.2013.140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"End-user privacy is a well-defined problem in Social Networks such as Facebook. Users have stated concern for their privacy yet display behaviour to the contrary within the system, a phenomenon known as the privacy paradox. There is an assumption that high levels of concern for one's privacy should lead to a reluctance to disclose information and to an acceptance of highly protective measures within the network. Few works have studied this paradox in its entirety, each taking differing views of it and using a variety of measures. Furthermore, evidence for the paradox has been found between varying conceptual elements of it and hence, there is a need for a holistic study of this phenomenon in order to identify where the paradox manifests. This work implements a survey instrument aimed at examining if concern should be used as an indicator of intention and action as it is assumed in past literature. Results show that users of social networks desire a benchmark of privacy that is consistent across measures of concern. A survey instrument examining general statements of concern would appear to inadequate in exploring the complex nature of privacy in social networks.","PeriodicalId":129308,"journal":{"name":"2013 International Conference on Social Computing","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Privacy and Social Networks: Is Concern a Valid Indicator of Intention and Behaviour?\",\"authors\":\"T. Hughes-Roberts\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/SocialCom.2013.140\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"End-user privacy is a well-defined problem in Social Networks such as Facebook. Users have stated concern for their privacy yet display behaviour to the contrary within the system, a phenomenon known as the privacy paradox. There is an assumption that high levels of concern for one's privacy should lead to a reluctance to disclose information and to an acceptance of highly protective measures within the network. Few works have studied this paradox in its entirety, each taking differing views of it and using a variety of measures. Furthermore, evidence for the paradox has been found between varying conceptual elements of it and hence, there is a need for a holistic study of this phenomenon in order to identify where the paradox manifests. This work implements a survey instrument aimed at examining if concern should be used as an indicator of intention and action as it is assumed in past literature. Results show that users of social networks desire a benchmark of privacy that is consistent across measures of concern. A survey instrument examining general statements of concern would appear to inadequate in exploring the complex nature of privacy in social networks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":129308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2013 International Conference on Social Computing\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2013 International Conference on Social Computing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/SocialCom.2013.140\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2013 International Conference on Social Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/SocialCom.2013.140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

在Facebook等社交网络中,终端用户隐私是一个定义明确的问题。用户表示关心自己的隐私,但在系统内却表现出相反的行为,这种现象被称为隐私悖论。有一种假设认为,对个人隐私的高度关注应该导致人们不愿披露信息,并接受网络内的高度保护措施。很少有作品从整体上研究这个悖论,每个作品都对它采取不同的观点,并使用各种方法。此外,在它的不同概念元素之间发现了悖论的证据,因此,有必要对这一现象进行全面研究,以确定悖论的表现。这项工作实施了一项调查工具,旨在检查是否应该像过去文献中假设的那样,将关注用作意图和行动的指标。结果表明,社交网络的用户希望在关注的措施中有一个一致的隐私基准。一项审查一般关注声明的调查工具似乎不足以探索社交网络中隐私的复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Privacy and Social Networks: Is Concern a Valid Indicator of Intention and Behaviour?
End-user privacy is a well-defined problem in Social Networks such as Facebook. Users have stated concern for their privacy yet display behaviour to the contrary within the system, a phenomenon known as the privacy paradox. There is an assumption that high levels of concern for one's privacy should lead to a reluctance to disclose information and to an acceptance of highly protective measures within the network. Few works have studied this paradox in its entirety, each taking differing views of it and using a variety of measures. Furthermore, evidence for the paradox has been found between varying conceptual elements of it and hence, there is a need for a holistic study of this phenomenon in order to identify where the paradox manifests. This work implements a survey instrument aimed at examining if concern should be used as an indicator of intention and action as it is assumed in past literature. Results show that users of social networks desire a benchmark of privacy that is consistent across measures of concern. A survey instrument examining general statements of concern would appear to inadequate in exploring the complex nature of privacy in social networks.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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