Cited by 247Privacy, Security, and Data ProtectionSurvey Methodology and NonresponseDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

The Impact of Relative Standards on the Propensity to Disclose

Acquisti, Alessandro, John, Leslie K., Loewenstein, George·2012·Journal of Marketing Research

Abstract

Two sets of studies illustrate the comparative nature of disclosure behavior. The first set investigates how divulgence is affected by signals about others' readiness to divulge and shows a “herding” effect: Survey respondents are more willing to divulge sensitive information when told that previous respondents have made sensitive disclosures (Study 1a). The authors provide evidence of the process underlying this effect and rule out alternative explanations by showing that information on others' propensity to disclose affects respondents' discomfort associated with divulgence (Study 1b) but not their interpretation of the questions (Study 1c). The second set of studies investigates how divulgence is affected by the order in which inquiries of varying intrusiveness are made and suggests that divulgence is anchored by the initial questions in a survey. People are particularly likely to divulge when questions are presented in decreasing order of intrusiveness and less likely when questions are presented in increasing order (Study 2a). The authors show that the effect arises by affecting people's judgments of the intrusiveness of the inquiries (Study 2b). The effect is altered when, at the outset of the study, privacy concerns are primed (Study 2c) and when respondents are made to consider the relative intrusiveness of a different set of questions (Study 2d). This research helps illuminate how consumers' propensity to disclose is affected by continual streams of requests for personal information and by the equally unavoidable barrage of personal information about others.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1509/jmr.09.0215

Cites

64 of 64 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Acquisti, A., John, L. K., & Loewenstein, G.
Affiliations
  • Information Systems and Public Policy, Heinz College
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Acquisti, Alessandro
  • John, Leslie K.
  • Loewenstein, George
Venue
Journal of Marketing Research
Published
2012-04
Volume
49
Issue
2
Pages
160-174
ISSN
  • 0022-2437 (ISSN-L)
  • 1547-7193
OpenAlex
W1986518351
Cited by
247
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 3
FWCI
36.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Marketing Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
disclosure behavior, sensitive data, herding effect, anchoring, privacy concerns, consumer privacy

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