CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 522Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionInformation and Cyber SecurityCybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies

Misplaced Confidences: Privacy and the Control Paradox

Brandimarte, Laura, Acquisti, Alessandro, Loewenstein, George·2013·Social Psychological and Personality Science
DOI 10.1177/1948550612455931
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We test the hypothesis that increasing individuals’ perceived control over the release and access of private information—even information that allows them to be personally identified––will increase their willingness to disclose sensitive information. If their willingness to divulge increases sufficiently, such an increase in control can, paradoxically, end up leaving them more vulnerable. Our findings highlight how, if people respond in a sufficiently offsetting fashion, technologies designed to protect them can end up exacerbating the risks they face.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1948550612455931

Cites

8 of 8 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?

  • Greater control individuals have over the release of personal information is associated with a greater likelihood that they engage in risky behavior, that is, intentionally disclose the data.

    “Brandimarte et al. (2012) observed that the greater the control individuals have over the release of personal information, the greater the likelihood that they engage in risky behavior, that is, that they intentionally disclose the data.”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Brandimarte et al. (2012)

  • The literature indicates several factors that may influence e-privacy decisions, such as the degree of control over the release of personal information, benefits from data disclosure, and e-privacy concerns.

    “The literature indicates several factors that may influence eprivacy decisions, such as the degree of control over the release of personal information, benefits from data disclosure, and eprivacy concerns (e.g., Brandimarte et al., 2012;Felt et al., 2012;Egelman et al., 2013;Zafeiropoulou et al., 2013;Buck et al., 2014).”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Brandimarte et al., 2012

  • Control effects on disclosure decisions, similar to those observed by Brandimarte et al. (2012), are more likely to be observed in medium importance apps.

    “Therefore, our results contribute to the literature by suggesting that control effects on disclosure decisions-similar to the ones observed by Brandimarte et al. (2012)-are more likely to be observed in medium importance apps.”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Brandimarte et al. (2012)

  • Our findings limit the generalization of Brandimarte et al. (2012).

    “Consequently, our findings limit the generalization of Brandimarte et al. (2012).”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Brandimarte et al. (2012)

  • Our study produced mixed results regarding the control paradox.

    “Our study produced mixed results regarding the control paradox (Brandimarte et al., 2012).”

    From The privacy and control paradoxes in the context of smartphone apps (2022) · cites this paper as Brandimarte et al., 2012

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brandimarte, L., Acquisti, A., & Loewenstein, G.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
Brandimarte, Laura
ORCID
Venue
Social Psychological and Personality Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2012-08-09
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
340-347
ISSN
  • 1948-5506 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-5514
DOI
10.1177/1948550612455931
OpenAlex
W2143953012
Cited by
522
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 49 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 4
FWCI
99.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Social Psychological and Personality Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
Keywords
perceived control, sensitive information disclosure, privacy, personal data, personally identifiable information, privacy technologies, privacy paradox

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