RFID (radio frequency identification) is one of the most important technologies underlying ambient intelligence. It will enable myriad information services on retailers' shop floors and after sale. However, embedding chips in everyday products has stirred a considerable debate about people's privacy. So far it is unclear what the attitudes toward privacy in ambient intelligence are and whether they will affect the reputation of the retailer and acceptance of RFID-based information services. This article presents two empirical studies with 642 participants who saw an introductory film and subsequently evaluated the technology and potential privacy protection mechanisms. Results show that people are moderately privacy aware and that their privacy awareness is negatively related to their acceptance of the service. A group of “extreme rejecters” is identified, which hold highly negative attitudes toward RFID and significantly bias group means. The characteristics of this group are explored and privacy protection measures are evaluated.
Ackerman, M.S. (2004). Privacy in pervasive environments: Next generation labelling protocols. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8(6), 430-439.
2.
Ackerman, M.S., Cranor, L.F., & Reagle, J. (1999, November). Privacy in e-commerce: Examining user scenarios and privacy preferences. Paper presented at the 1st ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, Denver, CO.
3.
Batista, E. (2003). “Step back” for wireless ID tech? Retrieved May 31, 2007, from http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireless/news/2003/04/58385.
4.
Bearden, W.O., & Netemeyer, R.G. (1999). Handbook of marketing scales—Multi-item measures for marketing and consumer behavior research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Beier, G. (1999). Kontrollueberzeugungen im Umgang mit Technik [Control beliefs in exposure to technology]. ReportPsychologie, 24(9), 684-693.
6.
Berendt, B., Guenther, O., & Spiekermann, S. (2005). Privacy in e-commerce: Stated preferences vs. actual behavior. Communications of theACM, 48(3), 38-47.
7.
Brehm, J.W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press.
8.
Chai, W. (2003). Philips adds “off switch” to RFID tags. Retrieved January 14, 2007, from http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,2134292,00.htm.
9.
Cranor, L.F., Hogben, G., Langheinrich, M., Marchiori, M., Presler-Marshall, M., Reagle, J., et al. (2006). The Platform for Privacy Preferences 1.1 (P3P1.1) Specification. Retrieved May 31, 2007, from http://www.w3.org/tr/p3p11/.
10.
Cranor, L.F., Reagle, J., & Ackerman, M.S. (1999). Beyond concern: Understanding net users' attitudes about online privacy. (Technical Report No. TR 99.4.3) . Denver, CO: AT&T.
11.
Floerkemeier, C., & Schneider, R. (2004, November). Scanning with a purpose—Supporting the Fair Information Principles in RFID protocols. Paper presented at the Ubiquitous Computing Systems. Revised selected papers from the 2nd International Symposium on Ubiquitous Computing Systems, Tokyo, Japan.
12.
Fusaro, R. (2004, December). None of our business. Harvard Business Review, 33-44.
13.
Hine, C. (1998). Privacy in the marketplace. Information Society, 14(4), 253-262.
14.
Jarvenpaa, S.L., Tractinsky, N., & Vitale, M. (2000). Consumer trust in an Internet store. Information Technology and Management, 1(1/2), 45-71.
15.
Langheinrich, M. (2002, October). A privacy awareness system for ubiquitous computing environments. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, Heidelberg, Germany.
16.
Mehrabian, A., & Russell, J.A. (1974). An approach to environmental psychology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
P&AB. (2003). Consumer privacy attitudes: A major shift since 2000 and why. Privacy & American Business Newsletter, 1ß(6), 23.
18.
Park, S.H., Won, S.H., Lee, J.B., & Kim, S.W. (2003). Smart home—Digitally engineered domestic life. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 7(3/4), 189-196.
19.
Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
20.
Sheppard, B.H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P.R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research . Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 325-343.
21.
Shneiderman, B. (2004). Leonardos laptop. Human needs and the new computing technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22.
Spiekermann, S. (2005). Perceived control: Scales for privacy in ubiquitous computing. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network.
23.
Spiekermann, S., & Berthold, O. (2004, December). Maintaining privacy in RFID enabled environments— Proposal for a disable model. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Pervasive Computing , Vienna, Austria.
24.
Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., & Berendt, B. (2001, October). Stated privacy preferences versus actual behavior in EC environments: A reality check. Paper presented at the Wirtschaftsinformatik [Business Informatics], Augsburg, Germany.
25.
Spiekermann, S., & Ziekow, H. (2006). RFID: A systematic analysis of privacy threats and a 7-point plan to adress them. Journal of Information System Security, 1(3), 3-17.
26.
Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F.D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science , 46(2), 186-204.
27.
Weiser, M. (1991). The computer for the 21st century. Scientific American, 265, 94-104.
Zhang, P., & Li, N. (2004, December). Love at first sight or sustained effect: The role of perceived affective quality on user's cognitive reactions to information technology. Paper presented at the Twenty-Fifth International Conference on Information Systems, Washington, DC.
