Cited by 36Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionInformation and Cyber SecurityTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour

Factors affecting users' online privacy literacy among students in Israel

Weinberger, Maor, Zhitomirsky-Geffet, Maayan, Bouhnik, Dan·2017·Online Information Review

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the attitudes and influential factors of users’ knowledge and use of the tools designated for controlling and enhancing online privacy, which are referred to as online privacy literacy (OPL). Particularly, inspired by the protection motivation theory, a motivational factor is defined as comprising several variables which reflect users’ motivation to protect their online privacy. Design/methodology/approach To this end, a user study was conducted based on the quantitative method with the participation of 169 students from the Israeli academia who were administered closed-ended questionnaires. Findings Generally low to moderate levels of OPL were obtained. Interestingly, the multivariate linear regression analysis showed that motivational factors, such as users’ concern for personal information protection on the internet and users’ privacy self-efficacy and sense of anonymity when visiting a website, were among the strongest predictive factors of users’ OPL level. Social implications This research has social implications that might contribute to an increase in the OPL among internet users. Originality/value The direct influence of the examined factors on users’ OPL was not previously discussed in the literature. As a result of the study, a comprehensive model of user online privacy behavior was constructed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/oir-05-2016-0127

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

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

  • Educational level has been positively correlated with the level of privacy literacy.

    “Educational level has been positively correlated with the level of privacy literacy (e.g., Weinberger et al., 2017).”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Weinberger et al., 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weinberger, M., Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., & Bouhnik, D.
Affiliations
  • Bar-Ilan University (IL)
  • Jerusalem College of Technology (IL)
Venue
Online Information Review
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2017-09-11
Volume
41
Issue
5
Pages
655-671
ISSN
1468-4527 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2739975067
Cited by
36
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Online Information Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Technology Adoption and User Behaviour
Keywords
protection motivation theory, privacy self-efficacy, online privacy behavior, privacy tools, university students, internet users

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