Cited by 410Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourInformation and Cyber Security

Blissfully ignorant: the effects of general privacy concerns, general institutional trust, and affect in the privacy calculus

Kehr, Flavius, Kowatsch, Tobias, Wentzel, Daniel, Fleisch, Elgar·2015·Information Systems Journal

Abstract

Existing research on information privacy has mostly relied on the privacy calculus model, which views privacy‐related decision‐making as a rational process where individuals weigh the anticipated risks of disclosing personal data against the potential benefits. In this research, we develop an extension to the privacy calculus model, arguing that the situation‐specific assessment of risks and benefits is bounded by (1) pre‐existing attitudes or dispositions, such as general privacy concerns or general institutional trust, and (2) limited cognitive resources and heuristic thinking. An experimental study, employing two samples from the USA and Switzerland, examined consumer responses to a new smartphone application that collects driving behavior data and provided converging support for these predictions. Specifically, the results revealed that a situation‐specific assessment of risks and benefits fully mediates the effect of dispositional factors on information disclosure. In addition, the results showed that privacy assessment is influenced by momentary affective states, indicating that consumers underestimate the risks of information disclosure when confronted with a user interface that elicits positive affect.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/isj.12062

Cites

110 of 110 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 111 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kehr, F., Kowatsch, T., Wentzel, D., & Fleisch, E.
Affiliations
  • University of St.Gallen (CH)
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Corresponding author
Kehr, Flavius
Venue
Information Systems Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03-18
Volume
25
Issue
6
Pages
607-635
ISSN
  • 1350-1917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2575
OpenAlex
W2145595443
Cited by
410
References
111
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 48 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2
FWCI
68.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Information Systems Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (acceptedVersion)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Swiss insurance company
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
data privacy, privacy calculus, institutional trust, affect, information disclosure, risk-benefit assessment, heuristic processing, cognitive resources, mobile application

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