IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v137y2016i3d10.1007_s10551-015-2565-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Privacy Online: Development of a Social Contract Approach to Privacy

Author

Listed:
  • Kirsten Martin

    (George Washington University School of Business)

Abstract

Recent scholarship in philosophy, law, and information systems suggests that respecting privacy entails understanding the implicit privacy norms about what, why, and to whom information is shared within specific relationships. These social contracts are important to understand if firms are to adequately manage the privacy expectations of stakeholders. This paper explores a social contract approach to developing, acknowledging, and protecting privacy norms within specific contexts. While privacy as a social contract—a mutually beneficial agreement within a community about sharing and using information—has been introduced theoretically and empirically, the full impact on firms of an alternative framework to respecting the privacy expectations of stakeholders has not been examined. The goal of this paper is to examine how privacy norms develop through social contract’s narrative, to redescribe privacy violations given the social contract approach, and to critically examine the role of business as a contractor in developing privacy norms. A social contract narrative dealing specifically with issues of privacy is an important next step in exploring a social contract approach to privacy. Here, the narrative is used to explain to analyze the dynamic process of privacy norm generation within particular communities. Based on this narrative, individuals within a given community discriminately share information with a particular set of obligations in mind as to who has access to the information and how it will be used. Rather than giving away privacy, individuals discriminately share information within a particular community and with norms governing the use of their information. Similar to contractual business ethics’ impact on global commerce in explaining how and why norms vary across global contexts, the social contract approach to privacy explains how and why norms vary across communities of actors. Focusing on agreements around privacy expectations shifts the responsibility of firms from adequate notification to the responsibility of firms as contractors to maintain a mutually beneficial and sustainable solution.

Suggested Citation

  • Kirsten Martin, 2016. "Understanding Privacy Online: Development of a Social Contract Approach to Privacy," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 137(3), pages 551-569, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:137:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10551-015-2565-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2565-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-015-2565-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-015-2565-9?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. Alder & Marshall Schminke & Terry Noel, 2007. "The Impact of Individual Ethics on Reactions to Potentially Invasive HR Practices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 201-214, October.
    2. J. Oosterhout & Pursey Heugens, 2009. "Extant Social Contracts in Global Business Regulation: Outline of a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 729-740, October.
    3. 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.
    4. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    5. 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.
    6. Wempe, Ben, 2005. "In Defense of a Self-Disciplined, Domain-Specific Social Contract Theory of Business Ethics," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 113-135, January.
    7. Feng-Yang Kuo & Cathy Lin & Meng-Hsiang Hsu, 2007. "Assessing Gender Differences in Computer Professionals’ Self-Regulatory Efficacy Concerning Information Privacy Practices," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 145-160, June.
    8. Ross, William T. & Robertson, Diana C., 2000. "Lying: The Impact of Decision Context," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 409-440, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Robert Phillips & Michael Johnson-Cramer, 2006. "Ties that Unwind: Dynamism in Integrative Social Contracts Theory 1," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 283-302, October.
    11. Kirsten Martin, 2012. "Diminished or Just Different? A Factorial Vignette Study of Privacy as a Social Contract," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(4), pages 519-539, December.
    12. Bowie, Norman E. & Jamal, Karim, 2006. "Privacy Rights on the Internet: Self-Regulation or Government Regulation?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 323-342, July.
    13. Phillips, Robert A., 1997. "Stakeholder Theory and A Principle of Fairness," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 51-66, January.
    14. 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.
    15. Eastlick, Mary Ann & Lotz, Sherry L. & Warrington, Patricia, 2006. "Understanding online B-to-C relationships: An integrated model of privacy concerns, trust, and commitment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(8), pages 877-886, August.
    16. McCole, Patrick & Ramsey, Elaine & Williams, John, 2010. "Trust considerations on attitudes towards online purchasing: The moderating effect of privacy and security concerns," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 1018-1024, September.
    17. Sergio Román & Pedro Cuestas, 2008. "The Perceptions of Consumers Regarding Online Retailers’ Ethics and Their Relationship with Consumers’ General Internet Expertise and Word of Mouth: A Preliminary Analysis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 83(4), pages 641-656, December.
    18. Anthony Miyazaki, 2009. "Perceived Ethicality of Insurance Claim Fraud: Do Higher Deductibles Lead to Lower Ethical Standards?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 87(4), pages 589-598, July.
    19. Cases, Anne-Sophie & Fournier, Christophe & Dubois, Pierre-Louis & Tanner Jr., John F., 2010. "Web Site spill over to email campaigns: The role of privacy, trust and shoppers' attitudes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 63(9-10), pages 993-999, September.
    20. Donaldson, Thomas & Dunfee, Thomas W., 1995. "Integrative Social Contracts Theory," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 85-112, April.
    21. Katherina Glac & Tae Kim, 2009. "The “I” in ISCT: Normative and Empirical Facets of Integration," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 693-705, October.
    22. 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.
    23. Thomas Dunfee, 2006. "A Critical Perspective of Integrative Social Contracts Theory: Recurring Criticisms and Next Generation Research Topics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 303-328, October.
    24. Jeffery Thompson & David Hart, 2006. "Psychological Contracts: A Nano-Level Perspective on Social Contract Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 229-241, October.
    25. Pursey Heugens & J. Oosterhout & Muel Kaptein, 2006. "Foundations and Applications for Contractualist Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 211-228, October.
    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. Kirsten Martin, 2012. "Diminished or Just Different? A Factorial Vignette Study of Privacy as a Social Contract," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 111(4), pages 519-539, December.
    2. Martin, Kirsten, 2018. "The penalty for privacy violations: How privacy violations impact trust online," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 103-116.
    3. Grosso, Monica & Castaldo, Sandro & Li, Hua (Ariel) & Larivière, Bart, 2020. "What Information Do Shoppers Share? The Effect of Personnel-, Retailer-, and Country-Trust on Willingness to Share Information," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(4), pages 524-547.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Iacob Catoiu & Mihai Orzan & Octav-Ionut Macovei & Claudia Iconaru, 2014. "Modelling Users` Trust in Online Social Networks," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 16(35), pages 289-289, February.
    7. J. Oosterhout & Pursey Heugens, 2009. "Extant Social Contracts in Global Business Regulation: Outline of a Research Agenda," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(4), pages 729-740, October.
    8. Jongwoo Kim & Richard L. Baskerville & Yi Ding, 2020. "Breaking the Privacy Kill Chain: Protecting Individual and Group Privacy Online," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 171-185, February.
    9. Inman, J. Jeffrey & Nikolova, Hristina, 2017. "Shopper-Facing Retail Technology: A Retailer Adoption Decision Framework Incorporating Shopper Attitudes and Privacy Concerns," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 7-28.
    10. 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).
    11. Federico Ast, 2019. "The Deliberative Test, a New Procedural Method for Ethical Decision Making in Integrative Social Contracts Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 207-221, March.
    12. 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.
    13. Wei Zhou & Selwyn Piramuthu, 2015. "Information Relevance Model of Customized Privacy for IoT," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 19-30, September.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Waqar Nadeem & Mari Juntunen & Nick Hajli & Mina Tajvidi, 2021. "The Role of Ethical Perceptions in Consumers’ Participation and Value Co-creation on Sharing Economy Platforms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 421-441, March.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Duane Windsor, 2018. "Dynamics for Integrative Social Contracts Theory: Norm Evolution and Individual Mobility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 83-95, April.
    20. Milad Mirbabaie & Stefan Stieglitz & Nicholas R. J. Frick, 2021. "Hybrid intelligence in hospitals: towards a research agenda for collaboration," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(2), pages 365-387, June.

    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:kap:jbuset:v:137:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10551-015-2565-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.