Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Cognitive Heuristics Behind Disclosure Decisions

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Social Informatics (SocInfo 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10539))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Despite regulatory efforts to protect personal data online, users knowingly consent to disclose more personal data than they intend, and they are also prone to disclose more than they know. We consider that a reliance on cognitive heuristics is key to explaining these aspects of users’ disclosure decisions. Also, that the cues underpinning these heuristics can be exploited by organisations seeking to extract more data than is required. Through the lens of an existing credibility heuristic framework, we qualitatively analyse 23, one-to-one, semi-structured interviews. We identify six super-ordinate classes of heuristics that users rely upon during disclosures: PROMINENCE, NETWORK, RELIABILITY, ACCORDANCE, NARRATIVE, MODALITY, and a seventh non-heuristics TRADE class. Our results suggest that regulatory efforts seeking to increase the autonomy of the informed user are inapt. Instead the key to supporting users during disclosure decisions could be to positively nudge users through the cues underpinning these simple heuristics.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Metzger et al., found six heuristics through a process of reduction, i.e., Recognition is subsumed under Reputation, as to perceive reputation involves a prior recognition.

References

  1. Acquisti, A.: Privacy and security of personal information. In: Camp, L.J., Lewis, S. (eds.) Economics of Information Security in Advances in Information Security, vol. 12, pp. 179–186. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/1-4020-8090-5_14.pdf

  2. Acquisti, A.: Nudging privacy: the behavioral economics of personal information. Digit. Enlightenment Yearb. 2012, 193–197 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Acquisti, A., Grossklags, J.: Privacy attitudes and privacy behavior. In: Camp, L.J., Lewis, S. (eds.) Economics of Information Security, pp. 1–15. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/1-4020-8090-5_13.pdf

  4. Acquisti, A., Grossklags, J.: What can behavioral economics teach us about privacy? In: Digital Privacy, pp. 363–377. Auerbach Publications (2007). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.145.7609&rep=rep.1&type=pdf, http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/abs/10.1201/9781420052183.ch18

  5. Acquisti, A., John, L., Loewenstein, G.: The impact of relative standards on the propensity to disclose. J. Market. Res. 49(2), 160–174 (2012). http://journals.ama.org/doi/abs/10.1509/jmr.09.0215

  6. Adjerid, I., Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., Loewenstein, G.: Sleights of privacy. In: Proceedings of the Ninth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security - SOUPS 2013, p. 1. ACM (2013). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2501604.2501613

  7. Balebako, R., Jung, J., Lu, W., Cranor, L.F., Nguyen, C.: Little brothers watching you. In: Proceedings of the Ninth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security - SOUPS 2013, p. 1. ACM (2013). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2501604.2501616%5Cnwww.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-84883078013&partnerID=tZOtx3y1

  8. Balebako, R., Leon, P.G., Almuhimedi, H., Kelley, P.G., Mugan, J., Acquisti, A., Cranor, L.F., Sadeh, N.: Nudging users towards privacy on mobile devices. In: CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 722, pp. 23–26 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cialdini, R., Trost, M.: Social influence: social norms, conformity and compliance. In: The Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 2, pp. 151–192 (1998). http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1998-07091-021

  10. Fereday, J., Muir-Cochrane, E.: Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int. J. Qual. Methods 5(1), 80–92 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Fogg, B.J., Soohoo, C., Danielson, D.R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., Tauber, E.R.: How do users evaluate the credibility of web sites? A study with over 2,500 participants. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences (DUX 2003), pp. 1–15. ACM (2003). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=997078.997097

  12. Fogg, B.J.: Prominence-interpretation theory: explaining how people assess credibility online. In: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings, pp. 722–723. ACM (2003). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=765951%5Cnwww.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-84869039673&partnerID=40&md5=f36a1afb8a3a649f12e97c7d6b38854a

  13. Furnell, S., Phippen, A.: Online privacy: a matter of policy? Comput. Fraud Secur. 2012(8), 12–18 (2012). 10.1016/S1361-3723(12)70083-0

  14. Gambino, A., Kim, J., Sundar, S.S., Ge, J., Rosson, M.B.: User disbelief in privacy paradox: heuristics that determine disclosure. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2837–2843. ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gigerenzer, G., Gaissmaier, W.: Heuristic decision making. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 62, 451–482 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., Goldstein, D.G.: Fast and frugal heuristics are plausible models of cognition: reply to Dougherty, Franco-Watkins, and Thomas. Psychol. Rev. 115(1), 230–239 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M.: Fast and frugal heuristics: the adaptive toolbox. In: Simple Heuristics that make us Smart, pp. 3–34. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Goodman, M.: Future Crimes: Everything is Connected, Everyone is Vulnerable and What We can do about it. Anchor, Daman (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hansen, P.G., Jespersen, A.M.: Nudge and the manipulation of choice: a framework for the responsible use of the nudge approach to behaviour change in public policy. Eur. J. Risk Regul. 1, 3–28 (2013). http://ssrn.com/abstract=2555337

  20. Heikkinen, A., Wickström, G., Leino-Kilpi, H.: Understanding privacy in occupational health services. Nurs. Ethics 13(5), 515–530 (2006). http://nej.sagepub.com/content/13/5/515.abstract

  21. Higgins, E.: Promotion and prevention. Regulatory focus as a motivational principle.pdf. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 30, 1–46 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hollingsed, T., Novick, D.G.: Usability inspection methods after 15 years of research and practice. In: Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, pp. 249–255. ACM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Holloway, I.: Basic Concepts for Qualitative Research. Wiley, Hoboken (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hoofnagle, C.J.: Identity theft: making the known unknowns known. Harvard J. Law Technol. 21, 98–122 (2007). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=969441

  25. Kahn, C.M., Roberds, W.: Credit and identity theft. J. Monetary Econ. 55(2), 251–264 (2008). http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0304393207001250

  26. Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan, Basingstoke (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kehr, F., Wentzel, D., Mayer, P.: Rethinking the privacy calculus: on the role of dispositional factors and affect. In: The 34th International Conference on Information Systems, vol. 1, pp. 1–10 (2013). http://cocoa.ethz.ch/downloads/2013/11/1624_kehr_2013_privacy_icis.pdf

  28. Knijnenburg, B.P.: On the dimensionality of information disclosure behavior in social networks. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 71(12), 1144–1162 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Komanduri, S., Shay, R., Kelley, P.G., Mazurek, M.L., Bauer, L., Christin, N., Cranor, L.F., Egelman, S.: Of passwords and people. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2011), pp. 2595–2604. ACM (2011). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1978942.1979321

  30. Krasnova, H., Günther, O.: Privacy concerns and identity in online social networks. Identity Inf. Soc. 2(1), 39–63 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Krasnova, H., Spiekermann, S., Koroleva, K., Hildebrand, T.: Online social networks: why we disclose. J. Inf. Technol. 25(2), 109–125 (2010). http://www.palgrave-journals.com/doifinder/10.1057/jit.2010.6

  32. Kruger, J., Wirtz, D., Van Boven, L., Altermatt, T.W.: The effort heuristic. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40(1), 91–98 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Metzger, M.J.: Privacy, trust, and disclosure: exploring barriers to electronic commerce. J. Comput.-Mediated Commun. 9(4), 1–29 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Metzger, M.J., Flanagin, A.J.: Credibility and trust of information in online environments: the use of cognitive heuristics. J. Pragmatics 59, 210–220 (2013). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216613001768

  35. Metzger, M.J., Flanagin, A.J., Medders, R.B.: Social and heuristics approaches to credibility evaluation online. J. Commun. 60(3), 413–439 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Nielsen, J.: Usability inspection methods. In: Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 413–414. ACM (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Norberg, P.A., Horne, D.R., Horne, D.A.: The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. J. Consum. Affairs 41(1), 100–126 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Olivero, N., Lunt, P.: Privacy versus willingness to disclose in e-commerce exchanges: the effect of risk awareness on the relative role of trust and control. J. Econ. Psychol. 25(2), 243–262 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ryan, G.W., Bernard, H.R.: Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods 15(1), 85–109 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Solove, D.J.: Introduction: privacy self-management and the consent dilemma. Harvard Law Rev. 126, 1880–1903 (2012). http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2171018

  41. Sundar, S.S., Kang, H., Wu, M., Go, E., Zhang, B.: Unlocking the privacy paradox: do cognitive heuristics hold the key? In: CHI 2013 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 811–816 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Sundar, S.S.: The MAIN model: a heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In: Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility, pp. 73–100 (2008). http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/dmal.9780262562324.073

  43. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and robability. Cogn. Psychol. 5(2), 207–232 (1973). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0010028573900339

  44. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. In: Wendt, D., Vlek, C. (eds.) Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making, vol. 11, pp. 141–162. Springer, Heidelberg (1975). doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8

  45. Vila, T., Greenstadt, R., Molnar, D.: Why we can’t be bothered to read privacy policies models of privacy economics as a lemons market. In: Proceeding ICEC 2003 Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Electronic Commerce, pp. 403–407. ACM (2003). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=948057&dl=ACM&coll=DL&CFID=304526782&CFTOKEN=23143651

  46. Ward, R.: Physiological responses to different WEB page designs. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 59(1–2), 199–212 (2003). http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1071581903000193

  47. Weitzner, D.J., Abelson, H., Berners-Lee, T., Feigenbaum, J., Hendler, J., Sussman, G.J.: Information accountability. Commun. ACM 51(6), 82–87 (2008). http://dl.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=1349043&type=html

  48. Westin, A.F.: Social and political dimensions of privacy. J. Soc. Issues 59(2), 431–453 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Whitney, S., McCullough, L.B.: A typology of shared decision making, informed consent, and simple consent. Ann. Intern. Med. 140(1), 54–59 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Southampton, Highcliff Campus, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK

    Vincent Marmion, Felicity Bishop, David E. Millard & Sarah V. Stevenage

Authors
  1. Vincent Marmion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Felicity Bishop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David E. Millard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sarah V. Stevenage
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vincent Marmion .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA

    Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia

  2. University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA

    Afra Mashhadi

  3. University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

    Taha Yasseri

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Marmion, V., Bishop, F., Millard, D.E., Stevenage, S.V. (2017). The Cognitive Heuristics Behind Disclosure Decisions. In: Ciampaglia, G., Mashhadi, A., Yasseri, T. (eds) Social Informatics. SocInfo 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10539. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67217-5_35

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67217-5_35

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67216-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67217-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation