Cited by 172Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

The influence of user affect in online information disclosure

Wakefield, Robin·2013·The Journal of Strategic Information Systems

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsis.2013.01.003

Cites

13 of 13 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wakefield, R.
Affiliations
Baylor University (US)
Corresponding author
Wakefield, Robin
Venue
The Journal of Strategic Information Systems
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-06
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
157-174
ISSN
0963-8687 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2089981770
Cited by
172
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 1
FWCI
35.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Journal of Strategic Information Systems (publishedVersion)
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
positive affect, negative affect, online information disclosure, personal information disclosure, website trust, customer data, mood induction, web design, customer relationship management, business intelligence

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