CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 38Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionDigital Marketing and Social MediaConsumer Market Behavior and Pricing

Ethical side-effect of dataveillance in advertising: impact of data collection, trust, privacy concerns and regulatory differences on chilling effects

Open access
Strycharz, Joanna, Segijn, Claire M.·2024·Journal of Business Research
DOI 10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114490
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Technological advancements have resulted in the availability and usage of consumer data for digital advertising. This so-called reality of dataveillance may result in unintended ethical side-effects, such as chilling effects that involve self-regulation of media usage as a response to surveillance practices. The current study utilizes a two-step approach with a cross-national survey (N = 334) and an online experiment (N = 536), to study how different data collection methods for digital advertising (i.e., online profiling, watermarking), regulatory cross-country contexts (i.e., U.S., the Netherlands), and boundary effects (i.e., trust, privacy concerns) result in chilling effects. We found that chilling effects are context-dependent as they are mostly driven by watermarking and are more prevalent in the U.S. than in the Netherlands. These findings show that chilling effects are one of the possible side-effects of digital advertising. Cross-country differences show the importance of the cultural context and regulatory regime for consumer behavior.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114490

Cites

54 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Institutional governance and socio-cultural influences collectively determine audience perceptions of trust and skepticism regarding sustainability messages; however, evidence specific to influencers remains limited.

    “Cross-national research indicates that institutional governance and socio-cultural influences collectively determine audience perceptions of trust and skepticism regarding sustainability messages; however, evidence specific to influencers remains limited (Colleoni et al., 2022;Kim et al., 2025;Strycharz and Segijn, 2024).”

    From Cross-national evidence on influencer-driven green choice: a moderated-mediation model of authenticity, parasocial ties, and greenwashing exposure (2026) · cites this paper as Strycharz and Segijn, 2024

    The Discussion of Study 1 (p. 5) reports cross-national differences in trust and privacy concerns, and Theoretical Contributions (p. 11) suggests regulatory differences may help explain why governmental and legal trust matter more in the U.S. The paper concerns reactions to advertising data collection, not trust or skepticism toward sustainability messages; it also does not assess influencers or establish that governance and culture collectively determine those perceptions. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Governance regimes and socio-cultural priors co-produce responses to persuasive technologies and green messages.

    “These variations are consistent with research demonstrating that governance regimes and socio-cultural priors co-produce responses to persuasive technologies and green messages (Colleoni et al., 2022;Kim and Wang, 2024;Strycharz and Segijn, 2024).”

    From Cross-national evidence on influencer-driven green choice: a moderated-mediation model of authenticity, parasocial ties, and greenwashing exposure (2026) · cites this paper as Strycharz and Segijn, 2024

    The General Discussion (p. 11) examines how regulatory context, trust, and privacy concerns relate to chilling effects from data-driven advertising in the U.S. and the Netherlands. The Theoretical Contributions (p. 11) report different responses across the two countries, but do not establish that governance and socio-cultural factors jointly cause those differences. The paper does not address green messages, so that part of the cited claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Lyon, D. (2017). Surveillance culture: Engagement, exposure, and ethics in digital modernity. International Journal of Communication , 11 , 824 -842. https://doi.org/ 1932 -8036/20170005.
  2. Solove, D. J. (2007). I ' ve got nothing to hide and other misunderstandings of privacy 2007 editor ' s symposium. San Diego Law Review, 44 (4), 745 -772. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0148-2963(2300849-4/h0245)
  3. Strycharz, J., Segijn, C. M. (2022b). Personalized advertising and chilling effects: Consumers ' change in media diet in response to corporate surveillance. In Advances in Advertising Research Series XI . Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden.
  4. Reding, V. (2011). Your data, your rights: Safeguarding your privacy in a connected world . European Commission. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0148-2963(2300849-4/h0305)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Strycharz, J., & Segijn, C. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Strycharz, Joanna
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Business Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-02
Volume
173
Pages
114490
ISSN
0148-2963 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114490
OpenAlex
W4390629078
Cited by
38
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13
FWCI
27.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Business Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Marketing and Social Media
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Market Behavior and Pricing
Keywords
dataveillance, online advertising, chilling effect, online profiling, watermarking, consumer privacy concerns, trust, data collection methods, advertising regulation, cross-national comparison, consumer 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