The smartphone as your follower: the role of smartphone literacy in the relation between privacy concerns, attitude and behaviour towards phone-embedded tracking
Abstract
Previous research on the collection of personal information in order to make tailor made advertising and services possible shows that the more overt the collection is, the more users will resist and try to avoid it. However, this research has always focussed on third parties, like apps and websites, collecting this information, while the smartphones on which these third parties operate also collect information. Based on the Psychological Ownership Theory and the Diffusion of Innovations Theory a survey (N = 924) has shown that the more privacy concerns users experience , the more negative their attitudes are towards the collection of location data by their smartphones, and that they adjust the settings of their smartphones in order to prevent being tracked. Users' earlier position on the adoption curve, and with that their smartphone literacy, decreases the strength of the connection between privacy concerns and attitude. It is important for the companies that are responsible for location tracking to help users feeling in control and to acknowledge that people own their data, not the companies who bought their data.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Smartphone literacy is a type of privacy literacy that includes, among others, knowledge about the type of data needed for an app to function.
“Smartphone literacy is a type of privacy literacy that includes, among others, knowledge about the type of data needed for an app to function (Ketelaar and van Balen, 2018).”
From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Ketelaar and van Balen, 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 85
- Authors
- Ketelaar, P. E., & van Balen, M.
- Affiliations
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Ketelaar, Paul E.
- ORCID
- Ketelaar, Paul E.
- Venue
- Computers in Human Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2018-01
- Volume
- 78
- Pages
- 174-182
- ISSN
- 0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2757205367
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5
- FWCI
- 16.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- privacy concerns, location tracking, smartphone location data, attitude-behavior relationship, diffusion of innovations, adoption curve, privacy settings, personal data ownership, user control
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review