The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 113 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 10 of the 90 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The privacy paradox – investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior – a systematic literature review
Open accessAbstract
Also known as the privacy paradox, recent research on online behavior has revealed discrepancies between user attitude and their actual behavior. More specifically: While users claim to be very concerned about their privacy, they nevertheless undertake very little to protect their personal data. This systematic literature review explores the different theories on the phenomenon known as the privacy paradox. Drawing on a sample of 32 full papers that explore 35 theories in total, we determined that a user’s decision-making process as it pertains to the willingness to divulge privacy information is generally driven by two considerations: (1) risk-benefit evaluation and (2) risk assessment deemed be none or negligible. By classifying in accordance with these two considerations, we have compiled a comprehensive model using all the variables mentioned in the discussed papers. The overall findings of the systematic literature review will investigate the nature of decision-making (rational vs. irrational) and the context in which the privacy paradox takes place, with a special focus on mobile computing. Furthermore, possible solutions and research limitation issues will be discussed.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This systematic literature review synthesizes 32 full papers covering 35 theories to explain the privacy paradox—the discrepancy between expressed privacy concerns and actual online disclosure behavior. It organizes explanations into rational risk-benefit calculation, biased risk assessment within that calculation, and little-to-no risk assessment, arguing that decision-making is often more irrational, especially in mobile computing.
Key findings
- Across 32 full papers and 35 theories, the review clusters explanations into two main categories: (1) risk-benefit calculation and (2) little to no risk assessment; the first is subdivided into rational calculation and biased risk assessment, with five bias types (heuristics; under-/overestimation of risks and benefits; immediate gratifications; difference between judgments of risks and benefits; habit).
- The authors conclude that decision-making takes place to a greater extent on an irrational level rather than a rational one, especially for mobile computing, and that the emergence of the privacy paradox is context-dependent.
- Concrete solutions remain scarce; proposed directions include user-oriented design, privacy awareness tools, situation-specific disclaimers, security warnings, and design cues adapted to different cognitive styles.
- Only nine studies addressed mobile applications, so the review broadened its parameters to include social network sites, general online contexts, websites, and e-commerce platforms.
Methods
- Systematic literature review using electronic database searches in GoogleScholar, Scopus, IEEE, Web of Science, and ACM with the keyword “privacy paradox,” plus a manual search of reference lists.
- Inclusion criteria: full peer-reviewed papers, peer-reviewed conference papers, and published book chapters that explicitly mention and discuss the privacy paradox with a theory or theoretical concept; excluded general privacy articles, personalization privacy paradox, practical-only solutions, legal/ethical discussions, research proposals, and commentaries.
- Searches resulted in an initial item set of 110 articles; the final sample was N = 32 full papers accounting for 35 theories, which were reviewed to detect clusters and differentiate rational from irrational approaches.
Limitations
- Stated: attitude and intention are not actual behavior, and actual behavior is seldom measured in the studies; privacy concerns seem highly situation-dependent and fluent over time, yet most studies researched privacy as a stable concept or used conventional polls unsuitable for studying online privacy.
- Stated: the authors note Dienlin and Trepte’s critique that the privacy paradox may be “a relic of the past,” but they disagree and argue future research should measure actual behavior; they also state that attempts to theoretically explain and practically solve the privacy paradox are still scarce.
- Evident from text: only nine studies addressed mobile applications, so the review broadened contexts; as a systematic literature review, it synthesizes theories rather than testing them empirically and reports no pooled effect sizes.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
10 of 90 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“During information exchange, negative consequences are rationally weighed against goals and possible outcomes, aiming to maximize benefits and minimize the risks of information disclosure (Keith et al., 2013;Li, 2012;Vroom, 1964).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Keith et al., 2013 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.1 frames disclosure as a rational choice involving costs and benefits, and §5.3 says the study demonstrates a tradeoff between disclosure benefits and risks. But §5.3 also identifies rational decision-making as a premise of privacy calculus and notes evidence of bounded rationality, so the claim overstates rational weighing and optimization as a description of actual behavior. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Not matchedcites Li, 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vroom, 1964
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Within this calculation, economic benefits, personalization or convenience and social benefit tend to negate the downside of perceived risks (Wilson and Valacich, 2012).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Wilson and Valacich, 2012
The “Perceived Benefits of Privacy Disclosure” section says that benefits counterbalance perceived risks and identifies economic benefits, personalization or convenience, and social or relational benefits as examples that tend to suppress the negative effect of perceived risks. The paper presents this as a finding from prior literature, which supports the citing sentence’s paraphrase. (LLM, conf=0.94)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“During online transactions for example, users disclose private information in return for small benefits, even if their general privacy concerns are contrary to this behavior (Wilson and Valacich, 2012).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.3. (Immediate) gratifications
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Wilson and Valacich, 2012
The Privacy Paradox section says that users concerned about privacy disclose information for online-shopping personalization, convenience, or discounts. Perceived Benefits of Privacy Disclosure says benefits can prompt disclosure despite general privacy concerns and describes disclosure for relatively small, immediate rewards (page numbers unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.90)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“If there is choice, individuals usually choose a small benefit in the short term over a larger benefit in the longer term.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.3. (Immediate) gratifications
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites O'Donoghue and Rabin, 2001 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction says present-biased people tend to pursue immediate gratification and that additional options can induce procrastination. It does not establish that, whenever there is a choice, individuals usually select a smaller short-term benefit over a larger long-term one; the modeled effect depends on the options and their costs. (LLM, conf=0.85)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Loewenstein, 1999 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A pattern emerged, making a differentiation between rational and irrational approaches for paradoxical behavior.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When examining the nature and factors of decision-making, the applied theories (N = 35) were clustered into two main categories: (1) decision-making based on a risk-benefit calculation or (2) decision-making based on prevalent benefits and little to no risk assessment.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2.1. Approaches to the privacy paradox
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 35Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main focus will be on mobile applications but as only nine studies addressing the subject could be ascertained via a literature search, the parameters in which the privacy paradox might be relevant were broadened to include social network sites, general online contexts, websites and e-commerce platforms.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, bounded rationality also has an influence on the decision-making process.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2. Biased risk assessment within the risk-benefit calculation
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the factors that may play a role in that cognitive process are very difficult to aggregate, calculate and compare, requiring high cognitive involvement.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Quite often, individuals are unwilling to access and process all of the information necessary to make informed decisions on issues affecting privacy due to perceived or actual cognitive limitations, choosing rather to satisfy themselves with subpar solutions.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- It may state two separate claims as one. 45
- Probably not a substantial claim. 68
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A user's ability to access all the relevant information is bounded by nature, leading to a situation where the risks are deemed to be outweighed by benefits (Deuker, 2010).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Deuker, 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3 says users have limited ability to access and process decision-relevant information, and that their processing and reasoning capabilities are restricted by nature. But it says bounded rationality can lead to either over- or underestimation of privacy risks; it does not establish that limited access itself causes users to judge benefits as outweighing risks. The separate discussion of immediate gratification says benefits can lead users to underestimate privacy risks. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In such instances, personalization, convenience, economic benefits and social advantages will suppress the perception of risks while over-emphasizing the perceived benefits of privacy disclosure (Wilson and Valacich, 2012).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Wilson and Valacich, 2012Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Perceived Benefits of Privacy Disclosure” (page not provided), the paper identifies economic, personalization or convenience, and social benefits as factors that tend to counteract the negative effect of perceived risks. It hypothesizes that these benefits increase perceived benefits of disclosure, but does not say that the benefit types themselves suppress the perception of risks or necessarily cause benefits to be over-emphasized; its risk-perception hypothesis concerns benefit immediacy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Even if people theoretically have all of the necessary privacy-relevant information, they are unable to make proper sense of all of the information.This leads to the application of simplified mental models that are often favor the benefits (Pötzsch, 2009).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Pötzsch, 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “Consider cognitive boundaries” section says that even with all privacy-relevant information available, people cannot use it all to make a rational decision and instead apply a simplified mental model. Section 3.2, “Balancing Values,” says privacy costs can become less salient while benefits are advertised. It does not establish that the simplified mental models themselves often favor benefits or that the cognitive limitation causes that preference. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Thus, individuals tend to heavily discount the low probability of high future risks (e.g.identity theft), resulting in a preference for almost instantaneous benefits (Acquisti, 2004;Acquisti and Grossklags, 2005;Deuker, 2010;Flender and Müller, 2012;Hughes-Roberts, 2013).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.3. (Immediate) gratifications
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Acquisti, 2004 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Acquisti and Grossklags, 2005 source
- Partly supportedcites Deuker, 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The section on immediate gratification says that immediate benefits can lead users to underestimate future privacy risks, and Section 3 says users give less weight to privacy threats that arise later. The copy does not characterize those risks as low-probability but high-impact, establish that they are heavily discounted, or give identity theft as an example. No page numbers were provided. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Quite often, individuals encounter self-control problems due to immediate gratifications (present bias) which leads to behavior that may backfire in the long run.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Supportedcites O'Donoghue and Rabin, 2001 source
Section II describes self-control problems as arising from the pursuit of immediate gratification in ways a person’s long-run self would not appreciate. The Introduction also explains that present-biased preferences give current well-being extra weight over future well-being. (LLM, conf=0.93)
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“If there is a choice, individuals usually choose a small benefit in the short term over a larger benefit in the longer term.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Laibson, 1997 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes a high short-term discount rate and gives an example of postponing savings to avoid an immediate sacrifice. That supports a preference for near-term benefits in some circumstances, but the paper does not establish that individuals usually choose a smaller near-term benefit over a larger later one whenever offered that choice. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“(2a) value of desired goals outweighs risks assessed.Additionally, this process is largely determined by in-and out-group considerations, (2b) the privacy valuation failed, and (2c) a knowledge deficiency eventuates as a result of incomplete information.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2.1. Approaches to the privacy paradox
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we determined that a user's decision-making process as it pertains to the willingness to divulge privacy information is generally driven by two considerations: (1) risk-benefit evaluation and (2) risk assessment deemed be none or negligible.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Abstract
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the majority of the analyzed studies showed a markedly different tendency as the theories to explain the privacy paradox can be characterized by the non-rational processes of decision-making.Here, the risk assessment within the risk-benefit calculation is biased by internal or external forces.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The previously discussed theories show that the decision process as it pertains to information disclosure is guided by rational cost-benefit calculations where benefits outweigh risks.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Quite often, users are not consciously aware of such a bias and as a consequence, choose benefits while ignoring accompanied risks.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3. Risk-benefit calculation guiding decision-making processes
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These searches resulted in an item set of 110 articles.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Category (1b) can be further divided into five different types of biases influencing the calculation process: (I) heuristics, (II) under-and/or overestimation of risks and benefits, (III) (immediate) gratifications, (IV) difference between judgments of risks and benefits, and (V) habit.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2.1. Approaches to the privacy paradox
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Drawing on a sample of 32 full papers that explore 35 theories in total”
- Also stated in: § 2. Method · plain
“This eventually resulted in a final sample of N = 32 full papers that accounted for 35 theories in total.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Abstract
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 32Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Also stated in: § 2. Method · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the majority of theories centered around a given cost-benefit calculation, with most favoring benefits over costs.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedn = 32Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both calculation processes ultimately lead to paradoxical behavior eventually.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2.1. Approaches to the privacy paradox
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The risk-benefit calculation category can be further divided into (1a) a largely rational calculation of risks and benefits whereas benefits outweigh risks, and (1b) a calculation process but risk assessment is biased and benefits are prevalent as a result.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2.1. Approaches to the privacy paradox
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other cases, the risk-benefit assessment is not completely rationally calculated, rather subject to and influenced by factors such as time constraints, immediate gratification or optimistic bias.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3. Risk-benefit calculation guiding decision-making processes
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The majority of research into the privacy paradox considers general internet activities with a focus on e-commerce and social networking activities in particular.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 1.1. The privacy paradox
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These biases are often nonconscious but play a major part in the eventual decision-making.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2. Biased risk assessment within the risk-benefit calculation
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, a decision is usually rapidly derived without an orderly subsequent analysis of the situation.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2. Biased risk assessment within the risk-benefit calculation
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, heuristics can lead to biases and an approach that has been successful in the past is no guarantee that it will prove suitable in another situation.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, most studies have researched privacy as a stable concept (Xu et al., 2010) or used conventional polls that are not suitable for studying online privacy (Baek, 2014).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.6. Research limitations
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Xu et al., 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Baek, 2014 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, heuristics hinder individuals from developing new ideas and alternative solutions.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Privacy concerns seem to be highly situation-dependent and can be described as a fluent concept that changes over time.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.6. Research limitations
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The systematic literature brought three decision-making categories effecting information privacy to light.First, decisionmaking can be divided into either a rational calculation of risk and benefits, or an irrational risk-benefit calculation characterized by biased risk assessment.”
- Also stated in: § 4.1. Categories of decision making in the context of information privacy · plain
“The third category of decision-making describes processes in which negligible or no risk assessment takes place.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.1. Categories of decision making in the context of information privacy
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 4.1. Categories of decision making in the context of information privacy · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Attitude and intention are not actual behavior and actual behavior is seldom measured in the studies.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.6. Research limitations
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This observation has not been researched to date, despite the fact that this might play an inherent role in solving the privacy paradox problem.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.5. The special case of mobile computing
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, research on this tendency is still scarce and should not be neglected when looking for solutions.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.5. The special case of mobile computing
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“attempts to theoretically explain and practically solve the problem of the privacy paradox are still scarce”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, only full, peer-reviewed papers, peer-reviewed conference papers and published book-chapters were included.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Articles that dealt with privacy issues and concerns in general were not included.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An electronic database literature search was conducted in GoogleScholar, Scopus, IEEE, Web of Science and ACM.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Risk-benefit calculation plays a major role in the context of information privacy, known as the freedom to decide with whom, how and to what extent personal data is shared (Li et al., 2010).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Li et al., 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“While users claim to be very concerned about their privacy, they nevertheless undertake very little to protect their personal data.”
- Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · plain
“This discrepancy between the expressed concern and the actual behavior of users is a phenomenon known as the privacy paradox: users claim to be very concerned about their privacy but do very little to protect their personal data.”
- Also stated in: § 1.1. The privacy paradox · boosted
“Known as the privacy paradox, it is a documented fact that users have a tendency towards privacy-compromising behavior online which eventually results in a dichotomy between privacy attitudes and actual behavior (Acquisti, 2004;Barnes, 2006).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Abstract
What the sources say
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 1. Introduction · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Only the subject articles in which the phenomenon of privacy paradox was explicitly mentioned and discussed were considered eligible.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Hence, intention and actual behavior are positively influenced by expected benefits (e.g. using an app) but also negatively affected by associated costs (e.g.possible data usage by third parties) (Culnan and Armstrong, 1999).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Culnan and Armstrong, 1999 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The cognitive style of decision-making during risk-benefit calculations is both analytical and conscious and can be described as 'logical, cause and effect, rule-based, hierarchical, sequential, process-oriented, slower to implement but quicker to change, high effort, oriented toward delayed action, conscious, and experienced actively with the individual aware of and in control of the process' (p.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Novak and Hoffman, 2008 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, a manual search of reference lists was conducted to identify additional papers that may have been missed by the electronic database search.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Extraversion and agreeableness increased perceived benefits from the use of mobile applications, regardless of the cultural environment.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pentina et al., 2016 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Only articles that discussed the privacy paradox explicitly with the aid of a theory or theoretical concept were included in the final sample.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 2. Method
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Quite often, the perceived benefits outweigh the perceived risks, which eventually leads to the neglecting of privacy concerns that often results in the disclosure of information in exchange for social or economic benefit (Privacy Calculus Theory; Culnan and Armstrong, 1999).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Culnan and Armstrong, 1999 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The stronger the intention, the more likely it is that a person will engage in a certain behavior.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Here, the decision-making process is based on three beliefs: (1) valence (emotional attitude towards a particular outcome and the allure of receiving a reward); (2) expectancy (self-confidence to do s.th.); and (3) instrumentality (perception of the probability of gaining reward).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vroom, 1964
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Thus, privacy concerns are considered but most individuals are unable to address them adequately (Phelan et al., 2016).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Phelan et al., 2016 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the context of social networking sites, teenagers in particular operate under bounded rationality and risk assessment takes place according to personal experiences pertaining to privacy invasion and not hypothetically in advance (Jia et al., 2015).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Jia et al., 2015 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The stronger such attitudes, perceived control and the compliance with social norms are, the more likely it is that an individual will engage in a certain behavior.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ajzen, 1985 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Based on a subjective belief system, an individual chooses a certain behavior over another because of the expected outcome of maximizing benefits while minimizing costs (Expectancy Theory; Vroom, 1964).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vroom, 1964
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The experiential processes are 'associative, emotional, low effort, rapid to implement but slow to change, parallel, immediate, outcome-oriented, holistic, preconscious and experienced passively with the process opaque to the individual' (p.57, Novak and Hoffman, 2008).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2. Biased risk assessment within the risk-benefit calculation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Novak and Hoffman, 2008 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Individuals constantly try to rationally maximize benefits but decision-making can only be rational within the limits of cognitive ability and available time (Theory of Bounded Rationality; Simon, 1982).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Simon, 1982
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Fundamentalists for example (those highly concerned about data sharing with third parties and unwilling to place ongoing trust in particular organizations) expressed higher privacy valuation than those with a more pragmatic stance (concerned about data-sharing practices but willing to engage in privacy calculus activities), or unconcerned individuals (willing to share data, also with third parties”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Motiwalla et al., 2014
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Intense intuitive concern may be overruled (but not reduced) by less intense concerns resulting from conscious consideration.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kahneman, 2003 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Privacy concerns did not have any influence on the adoption and use of mobile applications.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pentina et al., 2016 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, from their subjective point of view, the decision process may well appear rational (Flender and Müller, 2012).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Flender and Müller, 2012 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Taking the intentional perspective of a given rational behavior into account, the Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) states that an individual's behavioral intention depends on the attitude towards a certain behavior and the subjective norms.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1985) takes this a step further as behavioral intention is influenced by existing attitudes about desired outcomes, social norms and the evaluation of the risk-benefit of that outcome (perceived behavioral control).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ajzen, 1985 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Actual control may be the missing variable that could explain the discrepancy between intention and behavior.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.1. Risk-benefit calculation guided by rationality
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Also Sundar et al. (2013) found that privacy disclosure behavior in an online context is determined heuristically rather than systematically, which leads to a positive attitude towards information disclosure.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sundar et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For instance, being in a good mood lets people evaluate targets or situations as more positive than they may be.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schwarz, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We would argue that the technical processes underlying mobile computing exceed the comprehension of most users.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.3. Emergence of the privacy paradox is context-dependent
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Individuals tend to underestimate their own risk of privacy invasion while overestimating the chances that others will experience adverse events.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.2. Under-and/or overestimation of risks and benefits
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In reference to cognitive heuristics and mental shortcuts, Kehr et al. (2015) concluded that the privacy paradox may result from misleading situational cues which bias cognitive valuation processes (e.g.affective thinking) and the prevalence of situation-specific considerations as compared to generic attitudes (Extension to the Privacy Calculus Theory).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kehr et al., 2015 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Eventually, privacy disclosure intention is determined by situational cues even if dispositional attitudes regarding privacy behavior are different to intention.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kehr et al., 2015 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The study of Kehr et al. (2015) showed that privacy decisions are driven by situation-specific privacy assessment, general dispositions (i.e.general privacy concerns, institutional trust) and affect-based heuristics (quite often subconscious processes).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kehr et al., 2015 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Cues-Filtered-Out Theory (Sproull andKiesler, 1986, 1991) implies that individuals disclose more personal data in computermediated communication settings compared to face-to-face settings due to the absence of social and contextual cues leading to disclosure of information online despite general privacy concerns (Pötzsch et al., 2010).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Sproull and Kiesler, 1986, 1991
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Pötzsch et al., 2010 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Being in a positive mood positively influences privacy protection attitude, whereas being in a negative mood increases risk perception (Kehr et al., 2014).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kehr et al., 2014
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, judgments are based on feelings of ease or difficulty, as situation or targets that are easy to process are evaluated as more likely to be of less risk and more valuable.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schwarz, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Considering interpersonal relationships, social life is more than individual acts, yet it is determined by social forces such as traditions, institutions and moral codes.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When considering emotional factors during decision-making processes, individuals rely upon their feelings (mood, meta-cognition, emotion and body sensation), which generally leads to accurate responses but not always (Feeling-as-Information Theory; Schwarz, 2011).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schwarz, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, such protection measures are not easily accessible while downloading and installing apps, suggesting that the majority of users do not possess the expertise nor the experience to engage in what would be considered appropriate protective behavior.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.3. Emergence of the privacy paradox is context-dependent
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Mental short-cuts allow individuals to come to decisions quickly while suppressing any urge to think about the next action (Cognitive Heuristics; Tversky and Kahneman, 1975).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.1. Heuristics
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tversky and Kahneman, 1975 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This makes it even harder to overcome the privacy paradox as the desire to own a particular app seems to outweigh potential risks all too often.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.5. The special case of mobile computing
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Furthermore, individuals tend to organize their use of mobile applications according to goal orientation, with users showing a higher susceptibility to accepting privacy and security intrusions (e.g. a banking app) when compared to less important applications (e.g. a gaming app) (Shklovski et al., 2014).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.5. The special case of mobile computing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shklovski et al., 2014 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This situation, in combination with low transparency as it pertains to data usage by provider companies, eventually leads to misinformation and misinterpretation of how third parties will utilize users' information and data disclosure despite privacy concerns (Young and Quan-Haase, 2013).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.3.3. Knowledge deficiency due to incomplete information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Young and Quan-Haase, 2013 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to Oetzel and Gonja (2011), the contradictory behavior of privacy protection occurs because privacy, as a concept, is not yet integrated into an individual's social representation.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.3.2. Privacy valuation failed
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Oetzel and Gonja (2011) source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“By doing so, users become aware of the consequences of sharing information at a social privacy level but not at an institutional privacy level.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.3.3. Knowledge deficiency due to incomplete information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Young and Quan-Haase, 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This implies that users are lacking in privacy protection knowledge, at both the technological and legal levels; leading to misinterpretation of the likelihood of actual privacy violations and to inaccurate predictions of future hazards (Acquisti and Grossklags, 2005).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.3.3. Knowledge deficiency due to incomplete information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Acquisti and Grossklags, 2005 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Quinn (2016) found that habit (habit was identified as one out of nine uses and gratifications) probably inhibits engagement in privacy management tools on social networks, despite increased experience with social networking, which eventually leads to a disconnection between privacy concerns and behaviors.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 3.2.5. Habit
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Quinn (2016) source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Self-presentation (impression management) is the process by which individuals try to control the impression the make on others.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Leary and Kowalski, 1990 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Rule-of-thumb strategies play an important role in decision”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tversky and Kahneman, 1975 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The privacy paradox may result from misleading situational cues which bias the cognitive valuation processes (e.g.affective thinking) and the prevalence of situation-specific considerations as compared to generic attitudes.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Culnan and Armstrong, 1999 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“But heuristics can lead to biases as something that has been applicable in the past, is not necessarily suitable in another situation.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tversky and Kahneman, 1975 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Users express a desire for transparency and information control but are not able to act according to their needs for privacy (Shklovski et al., 2014).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 4.5. The special case of mobile computing
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shklovski et al., 2014 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Individuals feel indirect pressure to change their own behavior in order to conform to an admired peer group.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Crutchfield, 1955 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Individuals rely on their feelings (mood, meta-cognition, emotion and body sensation) in decision-making processes, often leading to accurate responses but sometimes not.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Schwarz, 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Users' participation in SNs consists of three phases: initial use, exploratory use and managed use.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hu and Ma, 2010
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as decision-making in a mobile environment is subject to environmental and circumstantial factors different from those encountered during desktop computing”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“there are two explanations for the privacy paradox: Either individuals act on their intuitive concern without assessing the risks due to incomplete understanding of it (no considered concern takes place) or high considered concern may be overridden by low considered concern”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kahneman, 2003 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“System I is fast and automatic but is vulnerable to influences that inhibit the rational decision-making process (produces intuitive concern for instance), whereas System II is rational and responsible for reasoning (produces considered concern, for instance).”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kahneman, 2003 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Behavior is a result of conscious choices with the purpose to maximize gain and minimize loss.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > 5. Conclusion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Vroom, 1964
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Individuals have a tendency to underestimate the likelihood of experiencing adverse events.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Irwin, 1953 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Privacy is a dynamic process of interaction regulation with others.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Altman, 1975
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This explains partly the privacy paradox as people do not engage in protective behavior because they fail to value data protection adequately.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Meynhardt, 2009 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Individuals do not process information in a rational way.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kahneman and Tversky, 1979 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The intention to disclose personal information is based on a rational risk-benefit calculation as perceived benefits are weighed against risk probability.”
§ The privacy paradox -Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior -A systematic literature review > Additional information
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Culnan and Armstrong, 1999 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
There is no unilaterally accepted theory used to explain online behavior when it comes to information disclosure, nor is there a consensus on the mental processes users rely upon when deciding whether to disclose information or not.
“To our knowledge, there is not one unilaterally accepted theory used to explain the online behavior of users when it comes to information disclosure, nor is there a consensus on the mental processes users rely upon when deciding whether to disclose information or not.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Individuals recognize their needs and how to satisfy them.
“This assumes that individuals recognize their needs and how to satisfy them.”
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Researchers have argued that the privacy paradox exists because privacy attitudes are often based on beliefs about privacy in general that do not correspond to attitudes toward privacy in specific circumstances (for reviews, see Barth & de Jong, 2017; Li, 2011).”
From Privacy Cynicism and its Role in Privacy Decision-Making (2024) · cites this paper as Barth & de Jong, 2017
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This seemingly paradoxical behavior can be explained by various psychological processes that take place during decision-making: (a) Users perform a risk-benefit calculation, guided by rationality, (b) they do show concerns but these concerns are overridden by factors such as desirability of the app, time constraints, or promised gratifications, or (c) they act on their intuition without assessing”
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 Barth and De Jong, 2017
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Research into online privacy shows that users are interested in privacy protection but that their privacy concerns rarely translate into actual behavior (Barth and De Jong, 2017;Joinson et al., 2010;Tsai et al., 2006).”
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 Barth and De Jong, 2017
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
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 Barth and de Jong, 2017
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,720 · cited 2×
“According to Prospect Theory (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979), decision-making processes take place in two stages.”
BackgroundTversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
(1980) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 25,810
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1975) · Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8 · Cited by 22,650
(1984) · Cited by 21,166
From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior
Ajzen, I. (1985) · Action Control · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2 · Cited by 19,057 · cited 4×
“The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1985) takes this a step further as behavioral intention is influenced by existing attitudes about desired outcomes, social norms and the evaluation of the risk-benefit of that outcome (perceived behavioral control).”
BackgroundInfluentialA BEHAVIORAL MODEL OF RATIONAL CHOICE
Simon, H. A. (1955) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1884852 · Cited by 15,877 · cited 3×
“Some have explained this paradoxical behavior from a rational perspective by arguing that users weigh the cost-benefit ratio of online information disclosure both consciously and rationally (Simon, 1955).”
BackgroundInfluential(1964) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 10,439
Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting
Laibson, D. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555253 · Cited by 6,122 · cited 2×
“Extended Two-Component Model of Self-Presentation Online (based on Leary and Kowalski, 1990) Self-presentation (impression management) is the process by which individuals try to control the impression the make on others.”
BackgroundMethod
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 797
Nam, T. (2018) · The Social Science Journal · doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2018.10.001 · Cited by 50
Regulating Recommending: Motivations, Considerations, and PrinciplesPreprint
Cobbe, J., & Singh, J. P. (2019) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3371830 · Cited by 47
Bolter, J. D., Engberg, M., & MacIntyre, B. (2021) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/11708.001.0001 · Cited by 46
den Abeele, E. V., Vanwesenbeeck, I., & Hudders, L. (2023) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2023.2205484 · Cited by 49
“A systematic literature review by Barth and De Jong (2017) suggests three decision-making categories that ultimately lead to a privacy paradox.”
BackgroundInfluentialManaging privacy paradox through national culture: Reshaping online retailing strategy
Liyanaarachchi, G. (2021) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102500 · Cited by 45
Kang, H., Shin, W., & Huang, J. (2021) · Internet Research · doi:10.1108/intr-01-2021-0005 · Cited by 52
Sharenting: A systematic review of the empirical literature
Tosuntaş, Ş. B., & Griffiths, M. D. (2024) · Journal of Family Theory & Review · doi:10.1111/jftr.12566 · Cited by 48
“Despite privacy concerns, they continue to share even sensitive information (Barth & De Jong, 2017).”
BackgroundRong, K., Zhou, D., Shi, X., & Huang, W. (2021) · Production and Operations Management · doi:10.1111/poms.13591 · Cited by 44
“…the e-commerce platform, after considering the trust and privacy issues brought about by social information disclosure, this kind of mixed influence contains two different directions called the privacy paradox (Barth and De Jong 2017) or a trust – privacy – behavioral intention (Liu et al. 2005).”
BackgroundMethodCyberbullying in the Metaverse
Upadhyay, U., Kumar, A., Sharma, G., Gupta, B. B., Alhalabi, W., Arya, V., & Chui, K. T. (2023) · Journal of Global Information Management · doi:10.4018/jgim.325793 · Cited by 43
“Users may regulate their online appearance and reduce risk by making educated privacy choices (Barth & De Jong, 2017).”
BackgroundDon't lose your coin! Investigating Security Practices of Cryptocurrency Users
Fröhlich, M., Gutjahr, F., & Alt, F. (2020) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3357236.3395535 · Cited by 40
“They identify the risk-benefit calculation as major decision-making process and discuss it through the different lenses offered by the surveyed publications [7].”
BackgroundChatzimichali, A., Harrison, R., & Chrysostomou, D. (2020) · Paladyn J. Behav. Robotics · doi:10.1515/pjbr-2021-0013 · Cited by 49
“This dilemma, known as the privacy-personalization paradox, is a special subcategory of what is widely referred to as the privacy paradox [55].”
BackgroundWiedemann, K. (2021) · GRURRR. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht, Rechtsprechungs-Report/GRUR-DVD/GRUR-CD/IIC/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht/Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht. Internationaler Teil · doi:10.1007/s40319-021-01090-6 · Cited by 39
Kim, J., Kim, T., Wojdynski, B. W., & Jun, H. (2022) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2022.101831 · Cited by 39
Pelău, C., Dabija, D., & Stanescu, M. (2024) · Oeconomia Copernicana · doi:10.24136/oc.2916 · Cited by 49
Lost in privacy? Online privacy from a cybersecurity expert perspective
Barth, S., de Jong, M. D., & Junger, M. (2022) · Telematics and informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2022.101782 · Cited by 38
Self-citationPrivacy and utility perceptions of social robots in healthcare
Jayaraman, S., Phillips, E. K., Church, D., & Riek, L. D. (2023) · Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2023.100039 · Cited by 41
Construing online consumers’ information privacy decisions: The impact of psychological distance
Bandara, R. J., Fernando, M., & Akter, S. (2021) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2021.103497 · Cited by 37
Kim, B., & Kim, D. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12125163 · Cited by 36
“According to the privacy paradox, the e ff ect of users’ disclosing intention on disclosing behaviors was not significant due to the inconsistency between behavioral intention and actual behaviors [10–12].”
BackgroundAnalysis and classification of privacy-sensitive content in social media posts
Bioglio, L., & Pensa, R. G. (2022) · EPJ Data Science · doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-022-00324-y · Cited by 36
“Instead, general purpose social media platforms usually encourage the usage of the real identity, although this does not prevent their users from disclosing very private information [12–14].”
BackgroundInfluentialChassidim, H. S., Ayalon, O., Mendel, T., Hirschprung, R. S., & Toch, E. (2020) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03298 · Cited by 35
“The discrepancy between attitudes towards privacy, which tend to re fl ect concerns and fears, and the actual privacy behaviors which tend to more self-disclosure is commonly referred to as the “ Privacy Paradox ” in OSNs (Acquisti and Gross, 2006; Barth and De Jong, 2017).”
BackgroundUnpacking the privacy paradox of consumers: A psychological perspective
Massara, F., Raggiotto, F., & Voss, W. G. (2021) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21524 · Cited by 39
Exploring the dark-side of E-HRM: a study of social networking sites and deviant workplace behavior
Nayak, S., Budhwar, P. S., Pereira, V. E., & Malik, A. (2021) · International Journal of Manpower · doi:10.1108/ijm-03-2021-0125 · Cited by 43
Exploring different appraisals in deviant sharing behaviors: A mixed-methods study
Hou, T., Luo, X. R., Ke, D., & Cheng, X. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.09.066 · Cited by 37
A Survey of User Perspectives on Security and Privacy in a Home Networking Environment
Pattnaik, N., Li, S., & Nurse, J. R. C. (2022) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3558095 · Cited by 38
“The concept of privacy paradox and related studies were covered in two reviews [24, 180].”
Public Opinion toward Artificial Intelligence
Zhang, B. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197579329.013.36 · Cited by 36
Zhao, W., Li, C., Ma, W., He, R., Rong, Y., Sarker, S., Liu, Q., & Tian, F. (2023) · Food Packaging and Shelf Life · doi:10.1016/j.fpsl.2023.101168 · Cited by 35
Ioannou, A., Tussyadiah, I. P., & Marshan, A. (2021) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21529 · Cited by 37
Jang, C., & Sung, W. (2021) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2021.101715 · Cited by 36
Zhang, D., Lim, J., Zhou, L., & Dahl, A. A. (2021) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/31633 · Cited by 43
“A number of studies have shown that users sometimes sacrifice their privacy in exchange for benefits and personalized services [20,21].”
BackgroundRevealing the relationship between rational fatalism and the online privacy paradox
Xie, W., Fowler-Dawson, A., & Tvauri, A. (2018) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2018.1552717 · Cited by 38
“The second theories to explain the online privacy paradox is the social theory (Barth and de Jong 2017; Blank, Bolsover, and Dubois 2014), which argues that the need for self-disclosure on SNS has been embedded into the social lives of users.”
BackgroundSmartwatch games: Encouraging privacy-protective behaviour in a longitudinal study
Williams, M., Nurse, J. R. C., & Creese, S. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.04.026 · Cited by 36
“We define the Privacy Paradox as the “ discrepancy between the expressed concern and the actual behavior of users ” (Barth & de Jong, 2017).”
A Review of Privacy Decision-making Mechanisms in Online Social Networks
Alemany, J., del Val, E., & García‐Fornes, A. (2022) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3494067 · Cited by 38
“Moreover, there is a huge distance between users’ concerns and their final privacy behavior (known as the Privacy Paradox), as shown in Reference [13].”
BackgroundKezer, M., Dienlin, T., & Baruh, L. (2022) · Cyberpsychology Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace · doi:10.5817/cp2022-4-1 · Cited by 35
“It may also happen in contexts where “value of desired goal outweighs risk assessment” (Barth & De Jong, 2017, p. 1048).”
BackgroundInfluentialHouichi, M., Jaïdi, F., & Bouhoula, A. (2024) · Computers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print) · doi:10.32604/cmc.2024.054007 · Cited by 53
Gürsoy, D., Başer, G., & Chi, C. G.-Q. (2025) · Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management · doi:10.1080/19368623.2025.2465634 · Cited by 33
“Trust in service providers is a critical factor influencing this behavior (Barth & De Jong, 2017).”
Past the Privacy Paradox: The Importance of Privacy Changes as a Function of Control and Complexity
Mourey, J. A., & Waldman, A. E. (2020) · Journal of the Association for Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/708034 · Cited by 33
Why people replace their aging smart devices: A push–pull–mooring perspective
Lenz, J., Bozakov, Z., Wendzel, S., & Vrhovec, S. L. R. (2023) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2023.103258 · Cited by 44
Trust transfer effects and associated risks in telemedicine adoption
Kuen, L., Schürmann, F., Westmattelmann, D., Hartwig, S., Tzafrir, S. S., & Schewe, G. (2023) · Electronic Markets · doi:10.1007/s12525-023-00657-0 · Cited by 39
“An explanation for the lack of significance of these relationships lies in the risk-benefit calculus (Barth & Jong, 2017).”
BackgroundWestin, F., & Chiasson, S. (2021) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445104 · Cited by 32
“The Privacy Paradox [2], which addresses diferences between users’ privacy attitudes and their respective behaviours, has been observed by the privacy HCI community for some time.”
BackgroundInfluentialWang, Y., & Pan, H. X. (2024) · Journal of Chinese Governance · doi:10.1080/23812346.2024.2378395 · Cited by 31
Mazurek, G., & Małagocka, K. (2019) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2019.07.008 · Cited by 33
Artificial intelligence assistants and risk: framing a connectivity risk narrative
Cunneen, M., Mullins, M., & Murphy, F. (2019) · AI & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-019-00916-9 · Cited by 31
Masur, P. K. (2021) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2021.1963460 · Cited by 33
“Many scholars have investigated the privacy paradox (more than 8,030 hits on Google Scholar1; for literature reviews, see Barth & de Jong, 2017; Kokolakis, 2017).”
BackgroundFox, A. K., Hoy, M. G., & Carter, A. E. (2022) · The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice · doi:10.1080/10696679.2021.2024441 · Cited by 31
“In their systematic review of the privacy paradox, Barth and de Jong (2017) offer several observations that apply to our observations of fathers, and Fox and Hoy’s (2019) findings regarding mothers, in terms of the sharing of their child’s PII.”
BackgroundInfluentialGenes wide open: Data sharing and the social gradient of genomic privacy
Haeusermann, T., Fadda, M., Blasimme, A., Tzovaras, B. G., & Vayena, E. (2018) · AJOB Empirical Bioethics · doi:10.1080/23294515.2018.1550123 · Cited by 31
“Such a phenomenon, commonly defined as the privacy paradox (Barth and de Jong 2017), suggests that individuals possess a subtler understanding of their privacy-related interests than might be presumed.”
BackgroundKhan, N. F., Ikram, N., Murtaza, H., & Asadi, M. A. (2021) · Kybernetes · doi:10.1108/k-05-2021-0377 · Cited by 36
`I make up a silly name': Understanding Children's Perception of Privacy Risks OnlinePreprint
Zhao, J., Wang, G., Dally, C., Slovák, P., Edbrooke-Childs, J. H., Kleek, M. G. V., & Shadbolt, N. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1901.10245 · Cited by 30
“…with incentives put in place by apps and platforms to get people to share their data, have yielded the so-called ‘privacy paradox’, a behaviour studied in teenagers [14] and adults [11] alike, in which individuals act in ways contrary to their stated privacy preferences and concerns [37, 38, 62].”
BackgroundTrust in open data applications through transparency
Wiencierz, C., & Lünich, M. (2020) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444820979708 · Cited by 33
“Research on the “privacy calculus” aims to explain the “privacy paradox,” suggesting that perceived monetary benefits and usefulness may outweigh privacy concerns (Barth and de Jong, 2017; Culnan and Armstrong, 1999).”
BackgroundChennamaneni, A., & Gupta, B. (2022) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2022.2106307 · Cited by 31
McDermott, C. D., Isaacs, J. P., & Petrovski, A. V. (2019) · Informatics · doi:10.3390/informatics6010008 · Cited by 29
The role of a location-based city exploration game in digital placemaking
Pang, C., Neustaedter, C., Moffatt, K., et al. (2019) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2019.1697899 · Cited by 28
“Yet, the concept of the privacy paradox considers the discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual behaviours, where users claim to be concerned about their privacy but do very little to protect their personal data (Barth and de Jong 2017).”
BackgroundPrivacy Rating: A User-Centered Approach for Visualizing Data Handling Practices of Online Services
Barth, S., Ionita, D., de Jong, M. D. T., Hartel, P., & Junger, M. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication · doi:10.1109/tpc.2021.3110617 · Cited by 29
Self-citationWang, L., Hu, H.-H., Wang, L., & Jian-qun, Q. (2022) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103028 · Cited by 29
Algorithm dependency in platformized news use
Schaetz, N., Gagrčin, E., Tóth, R., & Emmer, M. (2023) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/14614448231193093 · Cited by 38
“However, users’ privacy concerns do not necessarily deter users from using platforms for news use and various other purposes (for an overview, see Barth and de Jong, 2017).”
Awareness, Intention, (In)Action: Individuals’ Reactions to Data Breaches
Mayer, P. B., Zou, Y., Lowens, B. M., Dyer, H. A., Le, K., Schaub, F., & Aviv, A. J. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3589958 · Cited by 39
Titgemeyer, S. C., & Schaaf, C. P. (2022) · JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting · doi:10.2196/31411 · Cited by 24
“A discrepancy between expressed privacy concerns and actual information disclosure, which often becomes evident in online communication, is described as the privacy paradox [18].”
BackgroundInfluentialIntegrating Technical and Legal Concepts of Privacy
Sokolovska, A., & Kocarev, L. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2836184 · Cited by 24
“The first reflects so called privacy paradox: claiming to have privacy concerns but disclosing private information nonetheless [99], [100].”
BackgroundLinked by age: a study on social media privacy concerns among younger and older adults
Goyeneche, D., Singaraju, S., & Arango, L. (2023) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/imds-07-2023-0462 · Cited by 30
Cybersecurity awareness and fear of cyberattacks among online banking users in Malaysia
Vafaei-Zadeh, A., Nikbin, D., Teoh, K. Y., & Hanifah, H. (2024) · International Journal of Bank Marketing · doi:10.1108/ijbm-03-2024-0138 · Cited by 29
Sun, Q., Willemsen, M. C., & Knijnenburg, B. P. (2020) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2020.101924 · Cited by 26
Addressing the privacy paradox on the organizational level: review and future directions
Gotsch, M. L., & Schögel, M. (2021) · Management Review Quarterly · doi:10.1007/s11301-021-00239-4 · Cited by 34
Tracking sex: The implications of widespread sexual data leakage and tracking on porn websites
Maris, E., Libert, T., & Henrichsen, J. R. (2020) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444820924632 · Cited by 25
“A signi cant body of literature has addressed the social implications of online consumer surveillance, including users’ a itudes about being tracked (Barth and de Jong, 2017; Custers et al., 2014), the mechanisms behind data mining and tracking (Kennedy, 2016), how developers de ne and design for…”
BackgroundGarz, S., Xavier Giné, A., Karlan, D., Mazer, R., Sanford, C., & Zinman, J. (2020) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w28262 · Cited by 26
Butori, R., & Miltgen, C. L. (2023) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114205 · Cited by 34
Lu, C.-H. (2024) · Electronic Commerce Research and Applications · doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2024.101374 · Cited by 30
Opt out of privacy or "go home"
Westin, F., & Chiasson, S. (2019) · New Security Paradigms Workshop · doi:10.1145/3368860.3368865 · Cited by 23
“[9] published a systematic literature review organizing privacy paradox theories into main categories and sub-clusters.”
BackgroundInfluentialTraces of mobility: Examining location disclosure on social networks with mobile location tagging
Hsieh, S. H., & Lee, C. T. (2020) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2020.101366 · Cited by 24
Lin, H. (2025) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/20563051251313610 · Cited by 24
“This phenomenon resembles the privacy paradox (Barth & de Jong, 2017; Deibert, 2019), where individuals claim to value their information privacy, yet their actions often contradict those assertions.”
On Students’ Willingness to Use Online Learning: A Privacy Calculus Theory Approach
Jiang, X., Goh, T., & Liu, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.880261 · Cited by 41
“This inconsistent behavior is often referred to as the “privacy paradox” (Barth and de Jong, 2017).”
BackgroundGruzd, A. A., & Hernández-García, Á. (2022) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2022.2152366 · Cited by 24
“…aims to address the knowledge gap about the relevance of these variables in the context of self-disclosure practices on social media, and aims at providing a more complete view of the privacy paradox (Cheung, Lee, and Chan 2015; Barth and de Jong 2017; Hallam and Zanella 2017; Kokolakis 2017).”
BackgroundShi, J., Yuan, R., Yan, X., Wang, M., Qiu, J., Ji, X., & Yu, G. (2023) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/46562 · Cited by 26
Kyi, L., Mhaidli, A. H., Santos, C. T., Roesner, F., & Biega, A. J. (2024) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642260 · Cited by 28
“This is why designing privacy notices void of deceptive designs and using user-friendly language is important to prevent users from choosing the easiest, deceptive options.”
The role of personal data value, culture and self-construal in online privacy behaviour
Fleming, P., Bayliss, A. P., Edwards, S. G., & Seger, C. R. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0253568 · Cited by 28
Jahari, S. A., Hass, A., Hass, D., & Joseph, M. (2022) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.2029 · Cited by 24
Jamieson, J., Epstein, D. A., Chen, Y., & Yamashita, N. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3501963 · Cited by 22
“tion leakage caused by a contact tracing app, there appears to be a privacy paradox, the phenomenon that people are concerned about how digital technologies impact their privacy but take minimal action to protect their personal data [11].”
BackgroundPsychological factors that determine people's willingness‐to‐share genetic data for research
Bearth, A., & Siegrist, M. (2019) · Clinical Genetics · doi:10.1111/cge.13686 · Cited by 22
Hedging for Privacy in Smart Water Meters
Salomons, E., Perelman, L., & Housh, M. (2020) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2020wr027917 · Cited by 22
Understanding Trust, Privacy and Financial Fears in Online Payment
El Haddad, G., Aïmeur, E., & Hage, H. (2018) · 2018 17th IEEE International Conference On Trust, Security And Privacy In Computing And Communications/ 12th IEEE International Conference On Big Data Science And Engineering (TrustCom/BigDataSE) · doi:10.1109/trustcom/bigdatase.2018.00015 · Cited by 35
“However, within a shopping scenario characterized by a risk of potential privacy loss, customers can change their evaluation of risk and benefits associated with disclosure [17, 18].”
BackgroundFacebook sharenting in mothers of young children: The risks are worth it but only for some.
Briazu, R. A., Floccia, C., & Hanoch, Y. (2021) · Technology Mind and Behavior · doi:10.1037/tmb0000051 · Cited by 21
“For example, it is possible for users to be concerned about privacy yetdo little to protect their data, a phenomenon referred to as the privacy paradox (Barth & De Jong, 2017).”
PrivyTo: A privacy‐preserving location‐sharing platform
McKenzie, G., Romm, D., Zhang, H., & Brunila, M. (2022) · Transactions in GIS · doi:10.1111/tgis.12924 · Cited by 21
“There is a subset of the privacy literature that examines the privacy paradox : the discrepancy between users’ expressed privacy attitudes and their actual behavior (Barth & de Jong, 2017 ; Kokolakis, 2017; Norberg & Horne, 2007).”
BackgroundICT-based environmental participation in China: Same, same but digital?
Bondes, M., Kostka, G., & Rabe, W. (2024) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103688 · Cited by 22
Lei, X., & Liu, F. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2024.2316368 · Cited by 21
“With the increasing collection, storage, and use of personal data, users express concerns about data privacy and security, but they are still willing to share data for personalized experiences (Barth & de Jong, 2017; Gouthier et al., 2022).”
I shall, we shall, and all others will: paradoxical information security behaviour
Snyman, D. P., Kruger, H., & Kearney, W. D. (2018) · Information and Computer Security · doi:10.1108/ics-03-2018-0034 · Cited by 21
Chen, X., Wu, M., Chen, C., & Mou, J. (2024) · Online Information Review · doi:10.1108/oir-03-2024-0135 · Cited by 23
Rethinking information disclosure to GenAI in hotels: An extended parallel process model
Morosan, C. V. (2024) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2024.103965 · Cited by 22
Herriger, C., Merlo, O., Eisingerich, A. B., & Arigayota, A. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/71951 · Cited by 32
“…[149] Gray et al [179] Mind perception theory Sun et al [181] Johnson et al [180] Query theory Attié and Meyer-Waarden [137] Rogers [182]; Rogers et al [183] Theory of diffusion of innovation Our findings indicated that most theories in our subsample were also recognized by Barth and de Jong [13].”
InfluentialAcceptance and perception of wearable technologies: A survey on Brazilian and European companies
Schwambach, G. C. S., López, Ó. H., Sott, M. K., Tedesco, L. P., & Molz, R. F. (2021) · Technology in Society · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101840 · Cited by 20
Al-Nuaimi, M. N. (2022) · Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication · doi:10.1108/gkmc-12-2021-0209 · Cited by 20
Privacy concerns toward short-form video platforms: Scale development and validation
Wang, Q., Zhang, W., & Wang, H. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.954964 · Cited by 26
“Therefore, the dynamics of data sharing and disclosure have made privacy studies in this era more complicated than before (Barth and Jong, 2017; Belanger and Crossler, 2019; Wottrich et al., 2019).”
BackgroundAutomated privacy negotiations with preference uncertainty
Filipczuk, D., Baarslag, T., Gerding, E., & schraefel, M. C. (2022) · Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems · doi:10.1007/s10458-022-09579-1 · Cited by 25
“This level of realism is particularly important in privacy-related experiments, because past studies [11, 113] have consistently shown a discrepancy between a person’s stated preferences from surveys and actual disclosure decisions (i.e. the so-called privacy paradox).”
ResultLi, J., Sun, K., Huff, B. S., Bierley, A. M., Kim, Y., Schaub, F., & Fawaz, K. (2023) · IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P) · doi:10.1109/sp46215.2023.10179344 · Cited by 23
“Users also present paradoxical privacy choices as their self-reported privacy attitudes and concerns are inconsistent with their actual behaviors [10].”
Busch-Casler, J., & Radić, M. (2023) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/41635 · Cited by 23
“We did, however, assume that a positive intent will eventually lead to a positive action, that is, sharing PHI for the majority of participants [69].”
Experiments on personal information disclosure: Past and future avenues
Gómez‐Barroso, J. L. (2018) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2018.03.017 · Cited by 21
Privacy Preference Signals: Past, Present and Future
Hils, M., Woods, D., & Böhme, R. (2021) · Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies · doi:10.2478/popets-2021-0069 · Cited by 19
Cao, G., & Wang, P. (2022) · Industrial Management & Data Systems · doi:10.1108/imds-08-2021-0485 · Cited by 19
Zhou, S., & Liu, Y. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su15021657 · Cited by 22
Beyond the trade-offs on Facebook: the underlying mechanisms of privacy choices
Shih, H., & Liu, W. (2023) · Information Systems and e-Business Management · doi:10.1007/s10257-023-00622-6 · Cited by 24
“Considering how privacy protection is hindered by the freedom of privacy choices (Clarke 1999), or the behavior of self-interested human species (Acquisti et al. 2022), the phenomenon of privacy paradox needs more evidences, such as one’s cognitive biases of risk assessment (Barth and de Jong 2017).”
BackgroundFu, J., Zhang, J., & Li, X. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1052782 · Cited by 21
Liang, O. S., Chen, Y., Bennett, D. S., & Yang, C. C. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/18296 · Cited by 20
“We took precautions in handling the OHC data because of its sensitive nature [59,60].”
BackgroundA Digital Privacy Divide: How Privacy Concerns Reinforce Inequalities OnlinePreprint
Dutton, W. H., Blank, G., & Karpauskaite, E. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4177311 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Barth, S., & de Jong, M. D. T.
- Affiliations
- University of Twente (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Barth, Susanne
- ORCID
- Barth, Susanne
- Venue
- Telematics and Informatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-11
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1038-1058
- ISSN
- 0736-5853 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2609588687
- Semantic Scholar
- 42b1fa77452e085c3b7c0564b907d3f8e21cf7e2
- Cited by
- 798
- References
- 109
- Citations by year
- 2026: 94 · 2025: 128 · 2024: 90 · 2023: 107 · 2022: 105 · 2021: 103 · 2020: 81 · 2019: 61 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 20.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Telematics and Informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- NWO (628.001.011)
- 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 › User Authentication and Security Systems
- Keywords
- privacy paradox, privacy concerns, online behavior, privacy preservation, personal information disclosure, risk-benefit assessment, risk assessment, privacy decision-making, mobile computing, privacy attitudes
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-19, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-19 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
