IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v30y2019i2p375-388.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relative Privacy Valuations Under Varying Disclosure Characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph R. Buckman

    (Department of Management, College of Business Administration, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas 66506;)

  • Jesse C. Bockstedt

    (Department of Information Systems and Operations Management, Goizueta Business School, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322;)

  • Matthew J. Hashim

    (Department of Management Information Systems, Eller College of Management, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721)

Abstract

We investigate changes to the value that individuals place on the online disclosure of their private information in the presence of multiple privacy factors. We use an incentive-compatible mechanism to capture individuals’ willingness-to-accept (WTA) for a privacy disclosure in a series of three randomized experiments. Each experiment manipulates characteristics of a required privacy disclosure by altering the information context, the intended secondary use of the disclosed private information, and the requirement to disclose personally identifying information. We collect data from two populations (college students and Amazon Mechanical Turk workers) to aid with generalizability of our results. As methodological checks to rule out lack of awareness in the participants, we first increase the saliency of the privacy disclosure characteristics in the second experiment and then require participants to watch a video on the potential consequences of disclosing private information in the third experiment. Across the three experiments, we consistently observe null effects for each of the privacy factors, with two population-dependent exceptions in the second study. Our participants do acknowledge the increased risk introduced by the experimental factors, and the increased saliency and awareness do lead to higher privacy valuations on average. However, there is no consistent manifestation as significant main effects for the three privacy factors. This is in contrast to prior research, which has found significant effects for each of these factors when studied separately. The results provide a unique perspective on privacy valuations by showing that results from prior research on simple privacy decisions may not translate to more realistic, complex privacy disclosure decisions that involve multiple factors. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0818 .

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph R. Buckman & Jesse C. Bockstedt & Matthew J. Hashim, 2019. "Relative Privacy Valuations Under Varying Disclosure Characteristics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 375-388, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:30:y:2019:i:2:p:375-388
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2018.0818
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2018.0818
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2018.0818?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. List, John A. & Shogren, Jason F., 2002. "Calibration of Willingness-to-Accept," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 219-233, March.
    2. Posner, Richard A, 1981. "The Economics of Privacy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 405-409, May.
      • Posner, Richard A., 1980. "The Economics of Privacy," Working Papers 16, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    3. McDonald, John F & Moffitt, Robert A, 1980. "The Uses of Tobit Analysis," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 62(2), pages 318-321, May.
    4. Charles R. Plott & Kathryn Zeiler, 2005. "The Willingness to Pay–Willingness to Accept Gap, the "Endowment Effect," Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 530-545, June.
    5. Mary J. Culnan & Pamela K. Armstrong, 1999. "Information Privacy Concerns, Procedural Fairness, and Impersonal Trust: An Empirical Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 104-115, February.
    6. Shogren, Jason F. & Seung Y. Shin & Dermot J. Hayes & James B. Kliebenstein, 1994. "Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 255-270, March.
    7. David RivenbarK, 2010. "Experimentally Elicited Beliefs Explain Privacy Behavior," Working Papers 2010-09, University of Central Florida, Department of Economics, revised Feb 2011.
    8. Cam Donaldson & Andrew Jones & Tracy Mapp & Jan Abel Olson, 1998. "Limited dependent variables in willingness to pay studies: applications in health care," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 667-677.
    9. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    10. Deborah Compeau & Barbara Marcolin & Helen Kelley & Chris Higgins, 2012. "Research Commentary ---Generalizability of Information Systems Research Using Student Subjects---A Reflection on Our Practices and Recommendations for Future Research," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1093-1109, December.
    11. Janice Y. Tsai & Serge Egelman & Lorrie Cranor & Alessandro Acquisti, 2011. "The Effect of Online Privacy Information on Purchasing Behavior: An Experimental Study," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 254-268, June.
    12. Don L. Coursey & John L. Hovis & William D. Schulze, 1987. "The Disparity Between Willingness to Accept and Willingness to Pay Measures of Value," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(3), pages 679-690.
    13. Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
    14. Naresh K. Malhotra & Sung S. Kim & James Agarwal, 2004. "Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 336-355, December.
    15. Alessandro Acquisti & Leslie K. John & George Loewenstein, 2013. "What Is Privacy Worth?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(2), pages 249-274.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xudong Lin & Shuilin Liu & Xiaoli Huang & Hanyang Luo & Sumin Yu, 2021. "Platform Revenue Strategy Selection Considering Consumer Group Data Privacy Regulation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(22), pages 1-24, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Helia Marreiros & Mirco Tonin & Michael Vlassopoulos & M.C. Schraefel, 2016. "“Now that you mention it”: A Survey Experiment on Information, Salience and Online Privacy," BEMPS - Bozen Economics & Management Paper Series BEMPS34, Faculty of Economics and Management at the Free University of Bozen.
    2. Fehrenbach, David & Herrando, Carolina, 2021. "The effect of customer-perceived value when paying for a product with personal data: A real-life experimental study," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 222-232.
    3. Morlok, Tina & Matt, Christian & Hess, Thomas, 2017. "Privatheitsforschung in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften: Entwicklung, Stand und Perspektiven," Working Papers 1/2017, University of Munich, Munich School of Management, Institute for Information Systems and New Media.
    4. John K. Horowitz & Kenneth E. McConnell & James J. Murphy, 2013. "Behavioral foundations of environmental economics and valuation," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 4, pages 115-156, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Marreiros, Helia & Tonin, Mirco & Vlassopoulos, Michael & Schraefel, M.C., 2017. "“Now that you mention it”: A survey experiment on information, inattention and online privacy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-17.
    6. Oben K Bayrak & Bengt Kriström, 2016. "Is there a valuation gap? The case of interval valuations," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(1), pages 218-236.
    7. Emmanuel Flachaire & Guillaume Hollard & Jason Shogren, 2013. "On the origin of the WTA–WTP divergence in public good valuation," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(3), pages 431-437, March.
    8. Andrea Isoni, 2011. "The willingness-to-accept/willingness-to-pay disparity in repeated markets: loss aversion or ‘bad-deal’ aversion?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 409-430, September.
    9. Bleier, Alexander & Goldfarb, Avi & Tucker, Catherine, 2020. "Consumer privacy and the future of data-based innovation and marketing," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 466-480.
    10. Christina McGranaghan & Steven G. Otto, 2022. "Choice uncertainty and the endowment effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 83-104, August.
    11. Huseyin Cavusoglu & Tuan Q. Phan & Hasan Cavusoglu & Edoardo M. Airoldi, 2016. "Assessing the Impact of Granular Privacy Controls on Content Sharing and Disclosure on Facebook," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 848-879, December.
    12. Weiyin Hong & Frank K. Y. Chan & James Y. L. Thong, 2021. "Drivers and Inhibitors of Internet Privacy Concern: A Multidimensional Development Theory Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 539-564, January.
    13. Hung-Pin Shih & Wuqiang Liu, 2023. "Beyond the trade-offs on Facebook: the underlying mechanisms of privacy choices," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 353-387, June.
    14. Beja Jr, Edsel, 2012. "Two explanations to the willingness to accept and willingness to pay gap plus an alternative," MPRA Paper 36239, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    16. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    17. Krafft, Manfred & Arden, Christine M. & Verhoef, Peter C., 2017. "Permission Marketing and Privacy Concerns — Why Do Customers (Not) Grant Permissions?," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 39-54.
    18. Basu, Amita & Srinivasan, Narayanan, 2021. "A Modified Contingent Valuation Method Shrinks Gain-Loss Asymmetry," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    19. Chambers, Robert G. & Melkonyan, Tigran A., 2009. "Buy low, sell high: Price gaps and neoclassical theory," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(11), pages 720-729, December.
    20. Shogren, Jason F., 2006. "Experimental Methods and Valuation," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 969-1027, Elsevier.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:30:y:2019:i:2:p:375-388. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.