The DOI matches its Crossref record; 69 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“As examined by Kokolakis (2017) in a comprehensive review, the relationship between privacy attitudes and privacy behaviors is absent or weak at best.”
From Privacy Cynicism and its Role in Privacy Decision-Making (2024) · cites this paper as Kokolakis (2017)
In the citing paper
“Despite the apparent ease with which individuals often seem to disclose their information in exchange for being able to use online services (i.e., Carrascal etal., 2013; see also Kokolakis, 2017), individuals worry about their privacy.”
From Privacy Cynicism and its Role in Privacy Decision-Making (2024) · cites this paper as Kokolakis, 2017
In the citing paper
“The evidence for the existence of the privacy paradox in terms of the absence of a direct link between privacy attitudes and behaviors is mixed (for reviews, see Baruh etal., 2017; Kokolakis, 2017).”
From Privacy Cynicism and its Role in Privacy Decision-Making (2024) · cites this paper as Kokolakis, 2017
In the citing paper
“Therefore, privacy cynicism may be one of the explanations of the incongruence between privacy attitudes and concerns and privacy behaviors (Barnes, 2006; Kokolakis, 2017; Lutz et al., 2020).”
From Privacy Cynicism and its Role in Privacy Decision-Making (2024) · cites this paper as Kokolakis, 2017
In the citing paper
“According to Kokolakis (2017), users might show distinct privacy behavior in different contexts, suggesting that privacy behavior is highly context dependent.”
From Putting the privacy paradox to the test: Online privacy and security behaviors among users with technical knowledge, privacy awareness, and financial resources (2019) · cites this paper as Kokolakis (2017)
In the citing paper
“So far, such factors have usually been studied in isolation and most studies focused on the context of social network sites (SNSs) and e-commerce (cf.Kokolakis, 2017).”
From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Kokolakis, 2017
In the citing paper
“Several studies reported the privacy paradox in the context of SNSs and e-commerce (for reviews, see Barth and de Jong, 2017;Kokolakis, 2017).”
From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Kokolakis, 2017
In the citing paper
“Contact tracing as an extreme case of the privacy paradox: which values?”
From Contact tracing apps and values dilemmas: A privacy paradox in a neo-liberal world (2020) · cites this paper as Kokolakis, 2017
In the citing paper
“Otherwise put the covid crisis may be a nice illustration of the privacy paradox which states that we generally value privacy, but when we have an opportunity we are ready to trade it for something else (Kokolakis, 2017).”
From Contact tracing apps and values dilemmas: A privacy paradox in a neo-liberal world (2020) · cites this paper as Kokolakis, 2017
Citations
Cites
(1984) · Cited by 21,166
Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective
Bandura, A. (2001) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1 · Cited by 15,510
Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
Bottom, W. P., Gilovich, T. D., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. J. (2004) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/20159081 · Cited by 3,583
An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions
Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1060.0080 · Cited by 2,640
Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.025 · Cited by 2,349
The Privacy Paradox: Personal Information Disclosure Intentions versus Behaviors
NORBERG, P. A., HORNE, D. R., & HORNE, D. A. (2007) · Journal of Consumer Affairs · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x · Cited by 1,526
Solove, D. J. (2006) · University of Pennsylvania Law Review · doi:10.2307/40041279 · Cited by 1,388
A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States
Barnes, S. B. (2006) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v11i9.1394 · Cited by 1,336
Facebook and Online Privacy: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Unintended Consequences
Debatin, B., Lovejoy, J. P., Horn, A.-K., & Hughes, B. N. (2009) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01494.x · Cited by 1,271
Tönnies, F. (1963) · Cited by 1,198
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 70 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,001 of 1,001
Metadata
- Authors
- Kokolakis, S.
- Affiliations
- University of the Aegean (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Kokolakis, Spyros
- ORCID
- Kokolakis, Spyros
- Venue
- Computers & Security
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-01
- Volume
- 64
- Pages
- 122-134
- ISSN
- 0167-4048 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2207884471
- Semantic Scholar
- e041cf62681944a874a712ba216441cf117f4139
- Cited by
- 1,229
- References
- 70
- Citations by year
- 2026: 142 · 2025: 164 · 2024: 129 · 2023: 165 · 2022: 168 · 2021: 142 · 2020: 121 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 66 · 2017: 36
- FWCI
- 129.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computers & Security (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Keywords
- privacy paradox, privacy attitudes, privacy behavior, personal information disclosure, social networking sites, privacy concerns, behavioral economics, self-reported behavior
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