CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 503Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionInnovative Human-Technology InteractionTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour

Privacy, Trust, and Self-Disclosure Online

Open access
Joinson, Adam N., Reips, Ulf-Dietrich, Buchanan, Tom, Schofield, Carina B. Paine·2010·Human–Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1080/07370020903586662
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Author biographies Adam Joinson is a psychologist with interests in information systems, computermediated communication and privacy; he is a senior lecturer in Information Systems in the School of Management at the University of Bath Ulf-Dietrich Reips is a psychologist with interests in Internet-based research methodology (particularly experimental methodology); he is Assistant professor (Oberassistent) in the Department of Psychology, University of Zürich. Tom Buchanan is a psychologist with interests in Internet behavior; he is Reader in

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07370020903586662

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Concerns about online privacy increase with age.

    “many cross-sectional studies with children and young people of different ages indicate that concerns about online privacy increase with age [58,59,60,61].”

    From Cybervictimization and Online Sexual Harassment: Prevalence, Association, and Predictors (2024) · cites this paper as [60]

    The ‘Correlations Between Measures’ section reports a positive association between age and privacy concern (rₛ = .10, p < .01). But the ‘2.1. Method Participants’ section identifies the sample as predominantly adult distance-learning students aged 17–84; this does not establish the cited sentence’s claim about cross-sectional studies of children and young people. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In C2C markets, trust may be affected by privacy concerns or website quality.

    “In this context trust may be affected by privacy concerns ( Joinson et al., 2010) or website quality ( Gregg/ Walczak 2010; Yoon/Occeña 2015).”

    From Trust in the Sharing Economy (2016) · cites this paper as Joinson et al., 2010

  • Users are interested in privacy protection but their privacy concerns rarely translate into actual behavior.

    “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 Joinson et al., 2010

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. Ackerman, M. S., & Cranor, L. F. (1999). Privacy critics: UI components to safeguard users' pri- vacy. Proceedings of CHI'99 Extended Abstracts. New York: ACM.
  2. Ackerman, M. S., Cranor, L. F., & Reagle, J. (1999). Privacy in e-commerce: Examining user sce- narios and privacy preferences. Proceedings of ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce. New York: ACM.
  3. Acquisti, A. (2004). Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate grati- fication. Proceedings of the ACM Electronic Commerce Conference (EC '04). New York: ACM.
  4. Acquisti, A., Friedman, A., & Telang, R. (2006). Is there a cost to privacy breaches? An event study. Proceedings of the International Conference of Information Systems (ICIS).
  5. Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2003). Losses, gains, and hyperbolic discounting: An experimen- tal approach to information security attitudes and behavior. 2nd Annual Workshop on "Eco- nomics and Information Security.
  6. Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2005). Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security and Privacy, 26-33.
  7. Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2007, June). When 25 cents is too much: An experiment on willingness-to-sell and willingness-to-protect personal information. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Workshop on Economics and Information Security, WEIS 2007, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
  8. Ahern, S., Eckles, D., Good, N. S., King, S., Naaman, M., & Nair, R. (2007). Photo sharing: Over-exposed?: Privacy patterns and considerations in online and mobile photo sharing. Proceedings of CHI '07. New York: ACM.
  9. Ang, L., & Lee, B.-C. (2000). Influencing perceptions of trustworthiness in Internet com- merce: A rational choice framework. Proceedings of Fifth CollECTer Conference on Electronic Commerce, 1-12. Brisbane, Australia.
  10. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Per- sonality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
  11. Bellotti, V., & Sellen, A. (1993). Design for privacy in ubiquitous computing environments. Pro- ceedings of the Third European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work 1993, 77-92. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  12. Berendt, B., Gunther, O., & Spiekermann, S. (2005). Privacy in e-commerce: Stated preferences vs. actual behavior. Communications of the ACM, 48, 101-106.
  13. Buchanan, T., Paine, C., Joinson, A., & Reips, U.-D. (2007). Development of measures of on- line privacy concern and protection for use on the Internet. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 157-165.
  14. Gefen, D. (2002). Reflections on the dimensions of trust and trustworthiness among online consumers. ACM SIGMIS Database, 33, 38-53.
  15. Gideon, J., Cranor, L., Egelman, S., Acquisti, A. (2006). Power strips, prophylactics, and privacy, oh my! Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security.
  16. Harris, P. (2004). The European perspective-Is data protection value for money? The 26th In- ternational Conference on Privacy and Personal Data Protection.
  17. Harris and Associates Inc. (2004, June 10). New national survey on consumer privacy attitudes to be re- leased at Privacy & American Business Landmark Conference [Privacy and American Busi- ness press release]. Available from http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1? release_id=68484
  18. Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14, 29-64.
  19. Jensen, C., & Potts, C. (2004). Privacy policies as decision-making tools: An evaluation of on- line privacy notices. Proceedings of CHI '04. New York: ACM.
  20. Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: the role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177-192.
  21. Joinson, A. N. (2008). "Looking at," "Looking up" or "Keeping up with" people? Motives and uses of Facebook. Proceedings of CHI 2008New York: ACM.
  22. Jupiter Research. (2002a, May 20). Security and privacy data. Paper presented to the Federal Trade Commission Consumer Information Security Workshop. Retrieved June 20, 2005, from http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/security/0205201leathern.pdf Jupiter Research. (2002b, June 3). Seventy percent of US consumers worry about online privacy, but few take protective action (Survey summary). New York: Author. Retrieved from http://web1. forrester.com/forr/reg/jupiterlogin.jsp
  23. Margulis, S. T. (2003). On the status and contribution of Westin's and Altman's theories of pri- vacy. Journal of Social Issues, 59, 411-429.
  24. Metzger, M. J. (2004). Privacy, trust and disclosure: Exploring barriers to electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9(4). Retrieved June 20, 2005, from http:// jcmc.indiana.edu/vol9/issue4/metzger.html
  25. Milne, G. R., & Culnan, M. J. (2004). Strategies for reducing online privacy risks: Why con- sumers read (or don't read) online privacy notices. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18, 15-29.
  26. Miyazaki, A. D., & Krishnamurthy, S. (2002). Internet seals of approval: Effects on online privacy policies and consumer perceptions. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 36, 28-49.
  27. Nyshadham, E. A. (2000). Privacy policies of air travel Web sites: A survey and analysis. Journal of Air Transport Management, 6, 143-152.
  28. Palen, L., & Dourish, P. (2003). Unpacking privacy for a networked world. Proceedings of CHI '03. New York: ACM.
  29. Rubin, Z. (1975) Disclosing oneself to a stranger: Reciprocity and its limits. Journal of Experi- mental Social Psychology, 11, 233-260.
  30. Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., & Berendt, B. (2001). E-privacy in 2nd generation E-com- merce: Privacy preferences versus actual behavior. Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM EC'01), 38-47. New York, NY: ACM.
  31. Tsai, J., Egelman, S., Cranor, L., & Acquisti, A. (2007). The effect of online privacy information on purchasing behavior: An experimental study. Paper presented at the 6th Annual Workshop on Economics and Information Security (WEIS 2007), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 7-8 June 2008.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Joinson, A. N., Reips, U.-D., Buchanan, T., & Schofield, C. B. P.
Affiliations
  • University of Bath (GB)
  • Ikerbasque (ES)
  • University of Westminster (GB)
  • Ashridge Business School
ORCID
Venue
Human–Computer Interaction
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2010-02-25
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
1-24
ISSN
  • 0737-0024 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7051
DOI
10.1080/07370020903586662
OpenAlex
W2003686725
Cited by
503
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 14
FWCI
61.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Bath
  • University of Westminster
  • Universidad de Deusto
  • Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
Keywords
online privacy, trust, self-disclosure, computer-mediated communication, online behavior, online research methodology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review