Privacy Risk Perceptions and Privacy Protection Strategies
Several opinion polls have reported that many people claim to be concerned about their privacy, yet that most people in fact do very little to protect their privacy. Are privacy concerns indeed insufficient motivators to adopt privacy protection strategies? What then characterizes the users of these strategies? On the basis of a large scale survey amongst Dutch students, this paper explores the relation between privacy risk perception and privacy protection strategies in more detail. It elaborates on factors that constitute privacy risk perception, as well as three kinds of strategies adopted by individuals to protect their privacy: behavioral measures, common privacy enhancing technologies (PETs), and more complex PETs. Next, it explores the relation between the respondents’ perception and the strategies they employ in more detail to answer the question what characteristics the users of the various strategies have in terms of perception, gender and age. Gender appears not to influence privacy risk perception, yet men are more familiar with the various privacy protection strategies and use them more of-ten than women. In general, a higher privacy risk perception does not lead to the adoption of stronger or more protection strategies, except for the use of pseudonyms, cookie crunchers, anonymous email, safe email, and providing false personal data. Our analysis deepens the understanding of privacy risk perception and privacy protection strategies, yet leaves the privacy paradox unresolved.
KeywordsBehavioral Strategy Incorrect Answer Identity Theft Privacy Risk Informational Privacy
- 3.Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
- 5.Hinkle, D.E., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S.G.(1998). Applied statistics for the behavioural sciences (4th ed). Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston.Google Scholar
- 7.Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS Survival Manual. A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows(Versions10 and11). Open University Press: Buckingham.Google Scholar
- 9.Marx, G.T.(1994). New Telecommunications Technologies And Emergent Norms. In G. Platt and C. Gordon (Eds.). Self, Collective Behavior and Society. Essays in honour of Ralph Turner. JAI.Google Scholar
- 11.Marx, G.T. (2006). Varieties of personal Information as Influences on Attitudes Toward Surveillance. In K. Haggerty and R. Ericson (Eds.). The New politics of Surveillance and Visibility. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
- 13.Solove, D.J.(2003). Identity Theft, Privacy, and the Architecture of Vulnerability. Hastings Law Journal, 54, 1227.Google Scholar
- 14.Stalder, F. (2002). The Failure of Privacy Enhacing Technologies (PETs) and the Voiding of Privacy. Sociological Research Online, vol. 7, no. 2. Accessible at http://www.socresonline.org.uk/7/2/stalder.html.
- 15.Westin, A. (1967). Privacy and freedom. New York: Atheneum.Google Scholar