Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The disclosure of private data: measuring the privacy paradox in digital services

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Electronic Markets Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Privacy is a current topic in the context of digital services because such services demand mass volumes of consumer data. Although most consumers are aware of their personal privacy, they frequently do not behave rationally in terms of the risk-benefit trade-off. This phenomenon is known as the privacy paradox. It is a common limitation in research papers examining consumers’ privacy intentions. Using a design science approach, we develop a metric that determines the extent of consumers’ privacy paradox in digital services based on the theoretical construct of the privacy calculus. We demonstrate a practical application of the metric for mobile apps. With that, we contribute to validating respective research findings. Moreover, among others, consumers and companies can be prevented from unwanted consequences regarding data privacy issues and service market places can provide privacy-customized suggestions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdelzaher, T., Anokwa, Y., Boda, P., Burke, J., Estrin, D., Guibas, L., ... Reich, J. (2007). Mobiscopes for human spaces. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 6(2), 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2007.38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acquisti, A. (2004). Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate gratification. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (pp. 21–29). https://doi.org/10.1145/988772.988777.

  • Acquisti, A., & Gross, R. (2006). Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (pp. 36–58).

  • Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2004). Privacy attitudes and privacy behavior. In L. J. Camp & S. Lewis (Eds.), Economics of information security (pp. 165–178). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2005). Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security and Privacy, 3(1), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2005.22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science, 347(6221), 509–514. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, R., Militzer-Horstmann, C., & Zimmermann, H.-D. (2015). Editorial 25/2: electronic markets and privacy. Electronic Markets, 25(2), 87–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-015-0193-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, M., Lehrig, S., & Becker, S. (2015). Systematically deriving quality metrics for cloud computing systems. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM/SPEC International Conference on Performance Engineering (pp. 169–174). New York, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/2668930.2688043.

  • Bélanger, F., & Crossler, R. E. (2011). Privacy in the digital age: a review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 1017–1042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bélanger, F., Hiller, J. S., & Smith, W. J. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and site attributes. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3–4), 245–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0963-8687(02)00018-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berendt, B., Günther, O., & Spiekermann, S. (2005). Privacy in e-commerce: stated preferences vs. actual behavior. Communications of the ACM, 48(4), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1145/1053291.1053295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhme, R., & Freiling, F. C. (2008). On metrics and measurements. In I. Eusgeld (Ed.), Lecture notes in computer science: Vol. 4909. Dependability metrics. Advanced lectures (pp. 7–13). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouwers, E., van Deursen, A., & Visser, J. (2013). Evaluating usefulness of software metrics: An industrial experience report. Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (pp. 921–930).

  • Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, T., Paine, C., Joinson, A. N., & Reips, U. (2007). Development of measures of online privacy concern and protection for use on the internet. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(2), 157–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buck, C., Horbel, C., Germelmann, C. C., & Eymann, T. (2014). The unconscious app consumer. Proceedings of the 22nd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2014), Tel Aviv, June 9–11, 2014.

  • Chellappa, R. K., & Sin, R. G. (2005). Personalization versus privacy: an empirical examination of the online consumer’s dilemma. Information Technology and Management, 6(2–3), 181–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, H., Rivera-Sánchez, M., & Lim, S. S. (2009). A multinational study on online privacy: global concerns and local responses. New Media & Society, 11(3), 395–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culnan, M. J., & Armstrong, P. K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: an empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10(1), 104–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culnan, M. J., & Bies, R. J. (2003). Consumer privacy: balancing economic and justice considerations. Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 323–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, S. M. (1967). The major dimensions of perceived risk. In D. F. Cox (Ed.), Risk taking and information handling in consumer behavior (pp. 82–111). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Degirmenci, K., Guhr, N., & Breitner, M. (2013). Mobile applications and access to personal information: a discussion of users’ privacy concerns. Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2013), Milan, December 15–18, 2013.

  • Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dinev, T., Bellotto, M., Hart, P., Russo, V., Serra, I., & Colautti, C. (2006). Privacy calculus model in e-commerce: a study of Italy and the United States. European Journal of Information Systems, 15(4), 389–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egelman, S., Felt, A. P., & Wagner, D. (2013). Choice architecture and smartphone privacy: There’s a price for that. In R. Böhme (Ed.), The economics of information security and privacy (pp. 211–236). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Erl, T., Puttini, R., & Mahmood, Z. (2013). Cloud computing: concepts, technology and architecture. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Even, A., & Shankaranarayanan, G. (2007). Utility-driven assessment of data quality. ACM SIGMIS Database, 38(2), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1145/1240616.1240623.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felt, A. P., Ha, E., Egelman, S., Haney, A., Chin, E., & Wagner, D. (2012). Android permissions: user attention, comprehension, and behavior. Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2012), Washington, DC, July 11–13, 2012.

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graupner, E., Melcher, F., Demers, D., & Maedche, A. (2015). Customers’ intention to use digital services in retail banking: an information processing perspective. Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2015), Münster, May 26–29, 2015.

  • Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 337–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashem, I. A. T., Yaqoob, I., Anuar, N. B., Mokhtar, S., Gani, A., & Khan, S. U. (2015). The rise of “big data” on cloud computing: review and open research issues. Information Systems, 47, 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2014.07.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauff, S., Veit, D., & Tuunainen, V. (2015). Towards a taxonomy of perceived consequences of privacy-invasive practices. Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2015), Münster, May 26–29, 2015.

  • Hauser, J., & Katz, G. (1998). Metrics: you are what you measure! European Management Journal, 16(5), 517–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkey, K., & Inkpen, K. M. (2006). Keeping up appearances: Understanding the dimensions of incidental information privacy. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/1124772.1124893.

  • Heimbach, I., Gottschlich, J., & Hinz, O. (2015). The value of user’s facebook profile data for product recommendation generation. Electronic Markets, 25(2), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-015-0187-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, D. S. (2007). Complete guide to security and privacy metrics: Measuring regulatory compliance, operational resilience, and ROI. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horbach, M., & Horbach, M. (Eds.). (2013). Informatik 2013: Informatik angepasst an Mensch, Organisation und Umwelt. Koblenz: Bonner Köllen Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hui, K.-L., Tan, B. C. Y., & Goh, C.-Y. (2006). Online information disclosure: motivators and measurements. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT), 6(4), 415–441. https://doi.org/10.1145/1183463.1183467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, C., Potts, C., & Jensen, C. (2005). Privacy practices of internet users: self-reports versus observed behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63(1), 203–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, M., Klier, M., & Heinrich, B. (2007). How to measure data quality? A metric-based approach. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2007), Montreal, December 9–12, 2007.

  • Keith, M. J., Thompson, S. C., Hale, J., & Greer, C. (2012). Examining the rationality of information disclosure through mobile devices. Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2012), Orlando, December 16–19, 2012.

  • Keith, M. J., Thompson, S. C., Hale, J., Lowry, P. B., & Greer, C. (2013). Information disclosure on mobile devices: re-examining privacy calculus with actual user behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 71(12), 1163–1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keith, M. J., Babb, J. S., & Lowry, P. B. (2014). A longitudinal study of information privacy on mobile devices. In Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3149–3158).

  • Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. M. (2010). Principles of marketing. Upper Saddle River, NY: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasnova, H., & Veltri, N. F. (2010). Privacy calculus on social networking sites: explorative evidence from Germany and USA. Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2010), January 5–8, 2010.

  • Krasnova, H., Günther, O., Spiekermann, S., & Koroleva, K. (2009). Privacy concerns and identity in online social networks. Identity in the Information Society, 2(1), 39–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumaraguru, P., & Cranor, L. F. (2005). Privacy indexes: A survey of Westin’s studies. Technical Report, CMUISRI-05-138, Carnegie Mellon University, Institute of Software Research.

  • Laufer, R. S., & Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a concept and a social issue: a multidimensional developmental theory. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 22–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liggesmeyer, P. (2009). Software-Qualität: Testen, Analysieren und Verifizieren von Software. Heidelberg: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov, I., Welle, P., Loney, D., Tkachuk, A., Canis, L., Kim, J. B., & Bridges, T. (2011). Use of multicriteria decision analysis to support weight of evidence evaluation. Risk Analysis, 31(8), 1211–1225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01585.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lioudakis, G. V., Koutsoloukas, E. A., Dellas, N. L., Tselikas, N., Kapellaki, S., Prezerakos, G. N.,. ... Venieris, I. S. (2007). A middleware architecture for privacy protection. Computer Networks, 51(16), 4679–4696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2007.06.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynne, M. M., & Mentzer, K. (2014). Foresight for a responsible future with ICT. Information Systems Frontiers, 16.

  • Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): the construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R. O. (1986). Four ethical issues of the information age. MIS Quarterly, 10(1), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam Webster. (2017). Definition of metric. Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/metric.

  • Min, J., & Kim, B. (2015). How are people enticed to disclose personal information despite privacy concerns in social network sites? The calculus between benefit and cost. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 839–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nissenbaum, H. (1997). Toward an approach to privacy in public: Challenges of information technology. Ethics & Behavior, 7(3), 207–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Offermann, P., Blom, S., Schönherr, M., & Bub, U. (2010). Artifact types in information systems design science – a literature review. In D. Hutchison, T. Kanade, J. Kittler, J. M. Kleinberg, F. Mattern, J. C. Mitchell,. ... S. Aier (Eds.), Global perspectives on design science research (pp. 77–92). Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13335-0_6.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, J. W. (2002). Web site usability, design, and performance metrics. Information Systems Research, 13(2), 151–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roeber, B., Rehse, O., Knorrek, R., & Thomsen, B. (2015). Personal data: how context shapes consumers’ data sharing with organizations from various sectors. Electronic Markets, 25(2), 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-015-0183-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreiner, M., & Hess, T. (2015). Why are consumers willing to pay for privacy? An application of the privacy-freemium model to media companies. Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2015), Münster, May 26–29, 2015.

  • Sheng, H., Nah, F. F.-H., & Siau, K. (2008). An experimental study on ubiquitous commerce adoption: impact of personalization and privacy concerns. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(6), 15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., & Burke, S. J. (1996). Information privacy: measuring individuals’ concerns about organizational practices. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 167–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, H. J., Dinev, T., & Xu, H. (2011). Information privacy research: an interdisciplinary review. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 989–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Son, J.-Y., & Kim, S. S. (2008). Internet users’ information privacy-protective responses: a taxonomy and a nomological model. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 503–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., & Berendt, B. (2001). E-privacy in 2nd generation e-commerce: privacy preferences versus actual behavior. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce.

  • Spiekermann, S., Acquisti, A., Böhme, R., & Hui, K.-L. (2015). The challenges of personal data markets and privacy. Electronic Markets, 25(2), 161–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-015-0191-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, E. F., Gueutal, H. G., Gardner, D. G., & McClure, S. (1983). A field experiment comparing information: privacy values, beliefs, and attitudes across several types of organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(3), 459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stutzman, F., Gross, R., & Acquisti, A. (2013). Silent listeners: the evolution of privacy and disclosure on Facebook. The Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality, 4(2), 7–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tene, O., & Polonetsky, J. (2012). Privacy in the age of big data: a time for big decisions. Stanford Law Review Online, 64, 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Slyke, C., Shim, J. T., Johnson, R., & Jiang, J. J. (2006). Concern for information privacy and online consumer purchasing. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(6), 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallmüller, E. (2001). Software-Qualitätsmanagement in der Praxis: Software-Qualität durch Führung und Verbesserung von Software-Prozessen. München: Hanser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei, X., Gomez, L., Neamtiu, I., & Faloutsos, M. (2012). Malicious android applications in the enterprise: What do they do and how do we fix it? In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops (pp. 251–254).

  • Xu, H., Teo, H.-H., Tan, B. C. Y., & Agarwal, R. (2009). The role of push-pull technology in privacy calculus: the case of location-based services. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(3), 135–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhan, J., & Rajamani, V. (2008). The economics of privacy-privacy: People, policy and technology. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information Security and Assurance.

  • Zhou, T. (2013). Examining continuous usage of location-based services from the perspective of perceived justice. Information Systems Frontiers, 15, 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zukowski, T., & Brown, I. (2007). Examining the influence of demographic factors on internet users’ information privacy concerns. Proceedings of the 2007 Annual Research Conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT Research in Developing Countries.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. FIM Research Center, Universitätsstrasse 12, 86159, Augsburg, Germany

    Henner Gimpel, Dominikus Kleindienst & Daniela Waldmann

  2. Fraunhofer FIT - Project Group Business and Information Systems Engineering, Universitätsstrasse 12, 86159, Augsburg, Germany

    Henner Gimpel & Daniela Waldmann

Authors
  1. Henner Gimpel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dominikus Kleindienst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniela Waldmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniela Waldmann.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Ulrike Baumöl

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 109 kb)

Appendices

Appendix 1: Components of a design theory following Gregor and Jones (2007) satisfied by the present research

Table 7 Components of a decision theory and implementation in the present research
Full size table

Appendix 2: Uni-dimensional results of the survey

Table 8 Mean and median of the survey items for determining the benefit of using a specific app type
Full size table
Table 9 Distribution of respondents’ perceived risk by permission
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gimpel, H., Kleindienst, D. & Waldmann, D. The disclosure of private data: measuring the privacy paradox in digital services. Electron Markets 28, 475–490 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-018-0303-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-018-0303-8

Keywords

JEL classification

Search

Navigation