Predictive privacy: Collective data protection in the context of artificial intelligence and big data
Open accessAbstract
Big data and artificial intelligence pose a new challenge for data protection as these techniques allow predictions to be made about third parties based on the anonymous data of many people. Examples of predicted information include purchasing power, gender, age, health, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc. The basis for such applications of “predictive analytics” is the comparison between behavioral data (e.g. usage, tracking, or activity data) of the individual in question and the potentially anonymously processed data of many others using machine learning models or simpler statistical methods. The article starts by noting that predictive analytics has a significant potential to be abused, which manifests itself in the form of social inequality, discrimination, and exclusion. These potentials are not regulated by current data protection law in the EU; indeed, the use of anonymized mass data takes place in a largely unregulated space. Under the term “predictive privacy,” a data protection approach is presented that counters the risks of abuse of predictive analytics. A person's predictive privacy is violated when personal information about them is predicted without their knowledge and against their will based on the data of many other people. Predictive privacy is then formulated as a protected good and improvements to data protection with regard to the regulation of predictive analytics are proposed. Finally, the article points out that the goal of data protection in the context of predictive analytics is the regulation of “prediction power,” which is a new manifestation of informational power asymmetry between platform companies and society.
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?
GAI may inadvertently expose users' private and personal information to third parties through two primary pathways.
“In general, GAI may inadvertently expose users' private and personal information to third parties through two primary pathways (Mühlhoff 2023; Wu et al. 2024).”
From Bridging risk and retention: risk coping with privacy and hallucination in AI (2026) · cites this paper as Mühlhoff 2023
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 85
- Authors
- Mühlhoff, R.
- Affiliations
- Osnabrück University (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Mühlhoff, Rainer
- ORCID
- Mühlhoff, Rainer
- Venue
- Big Data & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2023-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2053-9517 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4366122041
- Cited by
- 85
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 7
- FWCI
- 152.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Big Data & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
- Keywords
- predictive analytics, data protection, big data, artificial intelligence, anonymized data, predictive power, discrimination, social inequality, exclusion, EU data protection law, platform companies, behavioral data
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