IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v33y2022i1p203-223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Achieving a Balance Between Privacy Protection and Data Collection: A Field Experimental Examination of a Theory-Driven Information Technology Solution

Author

Listed:
  • Bailing Liu

    (School of Information Management, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei 430000, China)

  • Paul A. Pavlou

    (C.T. Bauer College of Business, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204)

  • Xiufeng Cheng

    (School of Information Management, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei 430079, China)

Abstract

Companies face a trade-off between creating stronger privacy protection policies for consumers and employing more sophisticated data collection methods. Justice-driven privacy protection outlines a method to manage this trade-off. We built on the theoretical lens of justice theory to integrate justice provision with key privacy protection features and conceptualized the extent to which these features affect privacy concerns and information disclosure behavior. Notably, we proposed an information technology (IT) solution to balance the trade-off between privacy protection and consumer data collection. In the context of mobile banking applications, we prototyped a theory-driven IT solution, referred to as negotiation , active - recommendation privacy policy application, which enables customer service agents to interact with and actively recommend personalized privacy policies to consumers. We benchmarked our solution through a field experiment relative to two conventional applications: a non-negotiation privacy policy application (only a nonnegotiable privacy statement is posted) as a base method and a negotiation , non-active-recommendation privacy policy application (only a negotiation feature is integrated with the privacy policy). The results showed that the proposed negotiation , active - recommendation privacy policy application decreased privacy concerns and increased consumers’ information disclosure intentions and actual disclosure behavior. A post hoc analysis corroborated these findings, indicating that our design enhanced perceived procedural justice, interactional justice, and distributive justice among consumers and made them feel comfortable to disclose their personal information. Likewise, companies would be able to collect additional personal information from consumers, thereby contributing to a privacy-friendly environment. We discuss contributions and the implications of our proposed IT solution for consumers, companies, developers, and public policy officials.

Suggested Citation

  • Bailing Liu & Paul A. Pavlou & Xiufeng Cheng, 2022. "Achieving a Balance Between Privacy Protection and Data Collection: A Field Experimental Examination of a Theory-Driven Information Technology Solution," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 203-223, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:33:y:2022:i:1:p:203-223
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2021.1045
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2021.1045
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2021.1045?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. Gefen, David, 2000. "E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 725-737, December.
    2. David B. Meinert & Dane K. Peterson & John R. Criswell & Martin D. Crossland, 2006. "Privacy Policy Statements and Consumer Willingness to Provide Personal Information," Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), IGI Global, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Laurence Ashworth & Clinton Free, 2006. "Marketing Dataveillance and Digital Privacy: Using Theories of Justice to Understand Consumers’ Online Privacy Concerns," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 107-123, August.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Sparks, Beverley A. & McColl-Kennedy, Janet R., 2001. "Justice strategy options for increased customer satisfaction in a services recovery setting," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 209-218, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Alisa Frik & Luigi Mittone, 2016. "Factors Influencing the Perceived Websites' Privacy Trustworthiness and Users' Purchase Intentions," CEEL Working Papers 1609, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    2. Xuequn Wang & Mina Tajvidi & Xiaolin Lin & Nick Hajli, 2020. "Towards an Ethical and Trustworthy Social Commerce Community for Brand Value Co-creation: A trust-Commitment Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 137-152, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Slepchuk, Alec N. & Milne, George R. & Swani, Kunal, 2022. "Overcoming privacy concerns in consumers’ use of health information technologies: A justice framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 782-793.
    5. Corey Angst, 2009. "Protect My Privacy or Support the Common-Good? Ethical Questions About Electronic Health Information Exchanges," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 90(2), pages 169-178, November.
    6. Huarng, Kun-Huang & Yu, Tiffany Hui-Kuang & Lee, Cheng fang, 2022. "Adoption model of healthcare wearable devices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    7. Grace Fox & Lisa van der Werff & Pierangelo Rosati & Patricia Takako Endo & Theo Lynn, 2022. "Examining the determinants of acceptance and use of mobile contact tracing applications in Brazil: An extended privacy calculus perspective," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(7), pages 944-967, July.
    8. Sun, Shiwei & Zhang, Jin & Zhu, Yiwei & Jiang, Mian & Chen, Shuhui, 2022. "Exploring users' willingness to disclose personal information in online healthcare communities: The role of satisfaction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    9. Lu, Baozhou & Yi, Xiaoyang, 2023. "Institutional trust and repurchase intention in the sharing economy: The moderating roles of information privacy concerns and security concerns," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    10. Sumeet Gupta & Haejung Yun & Heng Xu & Hee-Woong Kim, 2017. "An exploratory study on mobile banking adoption in Indian metropolitan and urban areas: a scenario-based experiment," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 127-152, January.
    11. Nils Koester & Patrick Cichy & David Antons & Torsten Oliver Salge, 2022. "Perceived privacy risk in the Internet of Things: determinants, consequences, and contingencies in the case of connected cars," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(4), pages 2333-2355, December.
    12. Catherine L. Anderson & Ritu Agarwal, 2011. "The Digitization of Healthcare: Boundary Risks, Emotion, and Consumer Willingness to Disclose Personal Health Information," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 469-490, September.
    13. Tawfiq Alashoor & Mark Keil & H. Jeff Smith & Allen R. McConnell, 2023. "Too Tired and in Too Good of a Mood to Worry About Privacy: Explaining the Privacy Paradox Through the Lens of Effort Level in Information Processing," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1415-1436, December.
    14. 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.
    15. Liu, Yu-li & Yan, Wenjia & Hu, Bo, 2021. "Resistance to facial recognition payment in China: The influence of privacy-related factors," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5).
    16. 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.
    17. Wang, Tien & Duong, Trong Danh & Chen, Charlie C., 2016. "Intention to disclose personal information via mobile applications: A privacy calculus perspective," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 531-542.
    18. 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.
    19. Antonia Bralic & Mario Jadric & Maja Cukusic, 2014. "Factors Associated With Static-Price Online Group Buying," Economic Thought and Practice, Department of Economics and Business, University of Dubrovnik, vol. 23(1), pages 65-84, june.
    20. Rouven-B. Wiegard & Michael H. Breitner, 2019. "Smart services in healthcare: A risk-benefit-analysis of pay-as-you-live services from customer perspective in Germany," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(1), pages 107-123, March.

    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:33:y:2022:i:1:p:203-223. 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.