Cited by 512Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourInformation and Cyber Security

Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior

Gerber, Nina, Gerber, Paul, Volkamer, Melanie·2018·Computers & Security

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Privacy concerns have been widely recognized as a key antecedent of privacy-related attitudes and behaviors.

    “Privacy concerns have been widely recognized as a key antecedent of privacy-related attitudes and behaviors (Gerber et al. 2018).”

    From Bridging risk and retention: risk coping with privacy and hallucination in AI (2026) · cites this paper as Gerber et al. 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 70 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gerber, N., Gerber, P., & Volkamer, M.
Affiliations
  • Technische Universität Darmstadt (DE)
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
Corresponding author
Gerber, Nina
Venue
Computers & Security
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-08
Volume
77
Pages
226-261
ISSN
0167-4048 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2798247400
Cited by
511
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 84 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 4
FWCI
11.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Computers & Security (publishedVersion)
  • TUbilio (Technical University of Darmstadt) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (KIS1DSD066)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
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 › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
Keywords
privacy paradox, privacy behavior, privacy calculus, disclosure intention, personal data protection, privacy concerns, website trust, computer anxiety, online privacy

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