The goal of this study was to assess factors underlying user value judgments of services that collect personal data. A survey was used to present 6 scenarios describing various entertainment and mobile services, and to ask about the sensitivity of different types of data and about respondents’ tendencies to take privacy risks and trust authorities to protect privacy. The results showed that respondents with greater trust and privacy risk rated the services more highly, and their ratings were less affected by adding data collection to the services. However, their average ratings of the services with data collection were more highly associated with data sensitivity than with service value. The results have implications for companies that use new channels, such as the Internet and mobile devices, to better understand their customer base.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AcquistiA.FriedmanA.TelangR. (2006). Is there a cost to privacy breaches? An event study. Paper presented at the Twenty Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, Milwaukee, WI.
2.
AdamsA. (2000). Multimedia information changes the whole privacy ballgame, Proceedings of the tenth conference on Computers, freedom and privacy: challenging the assumptions. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: ACM.
3.
AdamsA.SasseM. A. (1999). Privacy issues in ubiquitous multimedia environments: Wake sleeping dogs, or let them lie?Paper presented at the INTERACT’99, Edinburgh, Scotland.
4.
AdMob. (2009). Mobile analytics: Data that drives decisions. Retrieved September 25, 2009, from http://analytics.admob.com/
5.
AgrawalR.PrasadJ. (1999). Are individual differences germane to the acceptance of new information technologies?Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361-391.
6.
BaillieL.FrohlichP.SchatzR. (2007). Exploring Social TV. Paper presented at the 29th International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces, Cavtat/Dubrovnik, Croatia.
7.
BarkuusL.DeyA. (2003). Location-based services for mobile telephony: A study of users’ privacy concerns. Paper presented at the the 9th IFIP TC13 International Conference on Human-Computer interaction(INTERACT 2003), Zurich, Switzerland.
8.
ChellappaR. K.SinR. G. (2005). Personalization versus privacy: An empirical examination of the online consumer’s dilemma. Inf. Technol. and Management, 6(2-3), 181-202.
9.
ChorianopoulosK.LekakosG.SpinellisD. (2003). Intelligent user interfaces in the living room: Usability design for personalized television applications. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Miami, Florida, USA.
10.
CulnanM. J.ArmstrongP. K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10(1), 104-115.
11.
DohmenT.FalkA.HuffmanD.SundeU.SchuppJ.WagnerG. G. (2005). Individual risk attitudes: New evidence from a large, representative experimentally validated survey (DIW Discussion Paper No. 511). Berlin.
12.
EphronE. (1997). Recency planning. Journal of Advertising Research, 37(4), 61-65.
13.
GefenD. (2000). E-commerce: The role of familiarity and trust. Omega: The international Journal of Management Science, 28(6), 727-737.
14.
HannI.-H.HuiK.-L.LeeT. S.PngI. P. L. (2002). Online information privacy: Measuring the cost-benefit trade-off. Paper presented at the 23rd International Conference on Information Systems, Barcelona, Spain.
15.
HurwitzJ.WheatleyD.LeeY. (2010). The relationship between user location history and interests in products and services. In Mobile Wireless Middleware, Operating Systems, and Applications (Vol. 48, pp. 301-312). Berlin: Springer.
KlasnjaP.ConsolvoS.ChoudhuryT.BeckwithR.HightowerJ. (2009). Exploring privacy concerns about personal sensing. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Pervasive Computing, Nara, Japan.
18.
KumaraguruP.CranorL. F. (2005). Privacy indexes: A survey of westin’s studies (No. CMU-ISRI-5-138): Carnegie Mellon University.
19.
MetzgerM. J. (2004). Privacy, trust, and disclosure: Exploring barriers to electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9(4).
20.
Mueller-HeumannG. (1992). Market and technology shifts in the 1990s: Market fragmentation and mass customization. Journal of Marketing Management, 8, 303-314.
21.
OttoP. N.AntónA. I.BaumerD. L. (2006). The choicepoint dilemma: How data brokers should handle the privacy of personal information (No. TR-2006-18). Raleigh, NC: The Privacy Place.
22.
PhelpsJ.NowakG.FerrellE. (2000). Privacy concerns and consumer willingness to provide personal information. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 27.
23.
SchoenbachlerD. D.GordonG. L. (2002). Trust and customer willingness to provide information in database-driven relationship marketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing (John Wiley & Sons), 16(3), 2.
24.
StaabS. (2005). Social networks applied. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 20(1), 80-93.
25.
WeberE. U.BlaisA.-R.BetzN. E. (2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 263-290.
26.
XuH.TeoH.-H.TanB. C. Y. (2005). Predicting the adoption of location-based services: The role of trust and perceived privacy risk. Paper presented at the Twenty-Sixth International Conference on Information Systems, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.
27.
ZhangH.GuerreroC.WheatleyD.LeeY. S. (2010). Privacy issues and user attitudes towards targeted advertising: A focus group study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, San Francisco, CA.
