Understanding Situational Online Information Disclosure as a Privacy Calculus
Open accessAbstract
The effect of situational factors is largely ignored by current studies on information privacy. This paper theorized and empirically tested how an individual's decision-making on information disclosure is driven by competing situational benefits and risk factors. The results of this study indicate that, in the context of an e-commerce transaction with an unfamiliar vendor, information disclosure is the result of competing influences of exchange benefits and two types of privacy beliefs (privacy protection belief and privacy risk belief). In addition, the effect of monetary rewards is dependent upon the fairness of information exchange. Monetary rewards could undermine information disclosure when information collected has low relevance to the purpose of the e-commerce transaction.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Previous research supports an inverse relationship between familiarity and reduced perceived risk.
“Previous research has supported the inverse relationship between familiarity and reduced perceived risk [51,52].”
From Consumer Responses to Generative AI Chatbots Versus Search Engines for Product Evaluation (2025) · cites this paper as [51]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 51 · Cited by 246
- Authors
- Li, H., Sarathy, R., & Xu, H.
- Affiliations
- Minnesota State University Moorhead (US)
- Oklahoma State University (US)
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Computer Information Systems
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-09
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 62-71
- ISSN
- 0887-4417 (ISSN-L)
- 2380-2057
- OpenAlex
- W2522559588
- Cited by
- 246
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 24.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Journal of Computer Information Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Journal of Computer Information Systems
- 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 › Information and Cyber Security
- Keywords
- information disclosure, privacy calculus, situational factors, online privacy, e-commerce, monetary rewards, perceived fairness, information relevance
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