The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The ‘Privacy Paradox’ in the Social Web: The Impact of Privacy Concerns, Individual Characteristics, and the Perceived Social Relevance on Different Forms of Self-Disclosure
Open accessAbstract
Given the diffusion of the Social Web and increased disclosure of personal information online, the ‘privacy paradox’ suggests that while Internet users are concerned about privacy, their behaviors do not mirror those concerns. This study investigates the potential influence of privacy concerns, psychological traits, attitudes to the Social Web and age on self-disclosure. Using an online survey of a representative sample of German Internet users (n = 2, 739), the variety and quality of self-disclosure as well as access were measured. The findings indicate that privacy concerns hardly impact self-disclosure, but different variables moderate this relation. Perceived social relevance and the number of applications used proved important. Users' general willingness to disclose is most important when providing sensitive information.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship
boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x · Cited by 16,251
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x · Cited by 9,939
Computer-Mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal, and Hyperpersonal Interaction
WALTHER, J. B. (1996) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/009365096023001001 · Cited by 4,798
I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience
Marwick, A. E., & boyd, D. (2011) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444810365313 · Cited by 4,612
(1973) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,836
Generation M2: Media in the Lives of 8- to 18-Year-Olds
Foehr, U. G., Rideout, V. J., & Roberts, D. F. (2010) · Cited by 2,190
Westin, A. F. (1967) · Cited by 1,908
Imagined Communities: Awareness, Information Sharing, and Privacy on the Facebook
Acquisti, A., & Gross, R. (2006) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/11957454_3 · Cited by 1,895
Westin, A. F. (1970) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 1,861
Livingstone, S. (2008) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444808089415 · Cited by 1,780
Cited by
Kokolakis, S. (2017) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002 · Cited by 1,229
Phua, J., Jin, S. V., & Kim, J. (. (2017) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.041 · Cited by 625
Baruh, L., Secinti, E., & Cemalcilar, Z. (2017) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12276 · Cited by 618
Norms of online expressions of emotion: Comparing Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp
Waterloo, S. F., Baumgartner, S. E., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2018) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444817707349 · Cited by 549
Gerber, N., Gerber, P., & Volkamer, M. (2018) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002 · Cited by 511
Metadata
- Authors
- Taddicken, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-12-18
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 248-273
- ISSN
- 1083-6101 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1968444823
- Cited by
- 585
- References
- 56
- FWCI
- 80.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The ‘Privacy Paradox’ in the Social Web: The Impact of Privacy Concerns, Individual Characteristics, and the Perceived Social Relevance on Different Forms of Self-Disclosure. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/jcc4.12052
- The paper
- Taddicken, M. (2014). The ‘Privacy Paradox’ in the Social Web: The Impact of Privacy Concerns, Individual Characteristics, and the Perceived Social Relevance on Different Forms of Self-Disclosure. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12052
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
