Privacy as information access and illusory control: the case of the Facebook News Feed privacy outcry
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?
Higher control can reduce certain types of privacy concerns, partially corroborating hypothesis 6.
“These results support that higher control can reduce certain types of privacy concerns (Hoadley et al., 2010)-partially corroborating hypothesis 6 (H 6 ).”
From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Hoadley et al., 2010
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 28 · Cited by 293
- Authors
- Hoadley, C. M., Xu, H., Lee, J. J., & Rosson, M. B.
- Affiliations
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Xu, Heng
- Venue
- Electronic Commerce Research and Applications
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 50-60
- ISSN
- 1567-4223 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2113977894
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 31
- FWCI
- 71.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Electronic Commerce Research and Applications (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
- Keywords
- privacy, Facebook, news feeds, social networking sites, privacy attitudes, privacy concerns, access to information, illusion of control, user behavior change, social media regulation
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
