References
- Aceto, G., Persico, V., & Pescapé, A. (2018). The role of information and communication technologies in healthcare: Taxonomies, perspectives, and challenges. Journal of Network and Computer Applictions, 108, 125-154 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2018.02.008.
- Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Privacy and human behaviour in the age of information. Science, 347(6221), 509–514. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1465
- Alashoor, T., Al-Maidani, N., & Al-Jabri, I. (2018, December). The privacy calculus under positive and negative mood states. In International Conference on Information Systems 2018, ICIS 2018. Association for Information Systems (AIS).
- Ballard, S., Chappell, K. M., & Kennedy, K. (2019). Judgment call the game: Using value sensitive design and design fiction to surface ethical concerns related to technology. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference (pp. 421–433). Association for Computing Machinery.
- Bansal, G., Zahedi, F. M., & Gefen, D. (2010). The impact of personal dispositions on information sensitivity, privacy concern and trust in disclosing health information online. Decision Support Systems, 49(2), 138–150. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2010.01.010
- Bansal, G., Zahedi, F. M., & Gefen, D. (2016). Do context and personality matter? Trust and privacy concerns in disclosing private information online. Information and Management, 53(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2015.08.001
- Bélanger, F., & Crossler, R. (2011). Privacy in the digital age: A review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 1–36. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/41409971
- Bol, N., Dienlin, T., Kruikemeier, S., Sax, M., Boerman, S. C., Strycharz, J., Helberger, N., & de Vreese, C. H. (2018). Understanding the effects of personalization as a privacy calculus: Analyzing self-disclosure across health, news, and commerce contexts. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 23(6), 370–388. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmy020
- Brell, T., Biermann, H., Philipsen, R., & Ziefle, M. (2019). Conditional privacy: Users’ perception of data privacy in autonomous driving. In Vehits 2019 - Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems (pp. 352–359). SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology.
- Burbach, L., Lidynia, C., Brauner, P., & Ziefle, M. (2019). Data protectors, benefit maximizers, or facts enthusiasts: Identifying user profiles for life-logging technologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 9–21. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.05.004
- Burgoon, J. K. (1982). Privacy and communication. Annals of the International Communication Association, 6(1), 206–249. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1982.11678499
- Choi, J. K., & Ji, Y. G. (2015). Investigating the importance of trust on adopting an autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31(10), 692–702. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2015.1070549
- Cuquet, M., & Fensel, A. (2018). The societal impact of big data: A research roadmap for Europe. Technology in Society, 54, 74–86. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.03.005
- Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
- Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
- Dinev, T., Albano, V., Xu, H., D’Atri, A., Hart, P., Atri, A. D., & Hart, P. (2016). Individuals’ attitudes towards electronic health records: A privacy calculus perspective. Advances in Healthcare Informatics and Analytics, 19, 19–50. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23294-2_2.
- Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for E-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1060.0080
- Dinev, T., Xu, H., Smith, J. H., & Hart, P. (2012). Information privacy and correlates: An empirical attempt to bridge and distinguish privacy-related concepts. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(3), 295–316 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2012.23.
- Distler, V., Lallemand, C., & Koenig, V. (2020). How acceptable is this? How user experience factors can broaden our understanding of the acceptance of privacy trade-offs. Computers in Human Behavior, 106, 106227. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106227
- Enserink, M., & Chin, G. (2018). The end of the privacy. Science, 347(6221), 490–491. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.347.6221.490
- Ermakova, T., Fabian, B., & Zarnekow, R. (2014). Acceptance of health clouds-a privacy calculus perspective. In European Conference on Information Systems (pp. 0–13).
- Esmaeilzadeh, P. (2019, August). An empirical evaluation of factors influencing patients’ reactions to the implementation of health information exchanges (HIEs). International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 35(13), 1135–1146. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1511181
- European Commission. (2019). Special eurobarometer 487a: The general data protection regulation (No. March).
- Franke, T., Attig, C., & Wessel, D. (2018). A personal resource for technology interaction: development and validation of the affinity for technology interaction (ATI) scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 35(6), 456–467. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150
- Ganeshan, R., Enriquez, A. D., & Freeman, J. V. (2018). Remote monitoring of implantable cardiac devices: Current state and future directions. Current Opinion in Cardiology, 33(1), 20–30. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1097/HCO.0000000000000471
- Gerber, N., Gerber, P., & Volkamer, M. (2018). Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior. Computers & Security, 77, 226–261. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002
- Ghazizadeh, M., Peng, Y., Lee, J. D., & Boyle, L. N. (2012). Augmenting the technology acceptance model with trust: Commercial drivers’ attitudes towards monitoring and feedback. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 56(1), 2286–2290. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181312561481
- Günther, W. A., Mehrizi, M. H. R., Huysman, M., & Feldberg, F. (2017). Debating big data: A literature review on realizing value from big data. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 26(3), 191–209. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2017.07.003
- Gupta, A., Deokar, A., Iyer, L., Sharda, R., & Schrader, D. (2018). Big data & analytics for societal impact: Recent research and trends. Information Systems Frontiers, 20(2), 185–194. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-018-9846-7
- Hair, J. F., Jr, Hult, G., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
- Helbing, D. (2019). Societal, economic, ethical and legal challenges of the digital revolution: From big data to deep learning, artificial intelligence, and manipulative technologies. In Towards digital enlightenment (pp. 47–72). Springer.
- Kehr, F., Kowatsch, T., Wentzel, D., & Fleisch, E. (2015). Blissfully ignorant: The effects of general privacy concerns, general institutional trust, and affect in the privacy calculus. Information Systems Journal, 25(6), 6. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12062
- Kehr, F., Wentzel, D., & Kowatsch, T. (2015). Rethinking privacy decisions: Pre-existing attitudes, pre-existing emotional states, and a situational privacy calculus. In ECIS 2015 Proceedings (pp. 1–15).
- Keith, M. J., Thompson, S. C., Hale, J., Lowry, P. B., & Greer, C. (2013). Information disclosure on mobile devices: Re-examining privacy calculus with actual user behavior. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 71(12), 1163–1173. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.08.016
- Kim, D., Park, K., Park, Y., & Ahn, J. H. (2019). Willingness to provide personal information: Perspective of privacy calculus in IoT services. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 273–281. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.022
- Knijnenburg, B. P., Raybourn, E., Cherry, D., Wilkinson, D., Sivakumar, S., & Sloan, H. (2017). Death to the privacy calculus?
- Kokolakis, S. (2015). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 2011(2013), 1–29. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002.
- Koopman, P., & Wagner, M. (2017). Autonomous vehicle safety: An interdisciplinary challenge. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine, 9(1), 90–96. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/MITS.2016.2583491
- Koops, B.-J., Newell, B. C., Timan, T., Skorvanek, I., Chokrevski, T., & Galic, M. (2017). A typology of privacy. University of Pennsylvanica Journal of International Law, 38(2), 1–93. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/upjiel38&div=14&id=&page=.
- Krasnova, H., Veltri, N. F., & Günther, O. (2012). Self-disclosure and privacy calculus on social networking sites: The role of culture. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 4(3), 127–135. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-012-0216-6
- Langheim, J. (2016). Energy consumption and autonomous driving. Springer.
- Lee, H., Lim, D., Kim, H., Zo, H., & Ciganek, A. P. (2015). Compensation paradox: The influence of monetary rewards on user behaviour. Behaviour & Information Technology, 34(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2013.805244
- Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46(1), 50–80. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392
- Li, H., Wu, J., Gao, Y., & Shi, Y. (2016). Examining individuals’ adoption of healthcare wearable devices: An empirical study from privacy calculus perspective. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 88(555), 8–17. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.12.010
- Li, Y. (2011a). Developing a dichotomy of information privacy concerns. In 17th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2011) (pp. 1–8).
- Li, Y. (2011b). Empirical studies on online information privacy concerns: Literature re- view and an integrative framework. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 28(28), 453–496. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.02828
- Li, Y. (2014). The impact of disposition to privacy, website reputation and website familiarity on information privacy concerns. Decision Support Systems, 57(1), 343–354. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2013.09.018
- Lidynia, C., Brauner, P., & Ziefle, M. (2018). A step in the right direction – understanding privacy concerns and perceived sensitivity of fitness trackers. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 608, 42–53. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60639-2_5.
- Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336–355. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0032
- Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015). Technology acceptance model: A literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(1), 81–95. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0348-1
- Markos, E., Milne, G. R., & Peltier, J. W. (2017). Information sensitivity and willingness to provide continua: A comparative privacy study of the United States and Brazil. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36(1), 79–96. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.15.159
- Merhi, M., Hone, K., & Tarhini, A. (2019, November). A cross-cultural study of the intention to use mobile banking between Lebanese and British consumers: Extending UTAUT2 with security, privacy and trust. Technology in Society, 59(59), 101151. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101151
- Milne, G. R., Pettinico, G., Hajjat, F. M., & Markos, E. (2016). Information sensitivity typology: Mapping the degree and type of risk consumers perceive in personal data sharing. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 51(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12111.
- Mothersbaugh, D. L., Foxx, W. K., Beatty, S. E., & Wang, S. (2012). Disclosure antecedents in an online service context: The role of sensitivity of information. Journal of Service Research, 15(1), 76–98. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670511424924
- Nissenbaum, H. (2010). Privacy in context: Technology policy and the integrity of social life. Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010.
- Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: Personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x
- Offermann-van Heek, J., Schomakers, E.-M., & Ziefle, M. (2019). Bare necessities? How the need for care modulates the acceptance of ambient assisted living technologies.
- Paine, C., Reips, U. D., Stieger, S., Joinson, A., & Buchanan, T. (2007). Internet users’ perceptions of ‘privacy concerns’ and ‘privacy actions.’ International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 65(6), 526–536. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.12.001
- Palen, L., & Dourish, P. (2003). Unpacking “privacy” for a networked world. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ‘03 (pp. 129). Association for Computing Machinery.
- Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Electronic Commerce/Spring, 7(3), 69–103. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2003.11044275.
- Peek, S. T. M., Wouters, E. J. M., van Hoof, J., Luijkx, K. G., Boeije, H. R., & Vrijhoef, H. J. M. (2014). Factors influencing acceptance of technology for aging in place: A systematic review. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 83(4), 235–248. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2014.01.004
- Reith, R., Buck, C., Lis, B., & Eymann, T. (2020). Tracking fitness or sickness-combining technology acceptance and privacy research to investigate the actual adoption of fitness trackers. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. University of Hawaii.
- Ringle, C., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS.
- Rohm, A. J., & Milne, G. R. (2004). Just what the doctor ordered the role of information sensitivity and trust in reducing medical information privacy concern. Journal of Business Research, 57(9), 1000–1011. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00345-4
- Ronzhyn, A., & Wimmer, M. A. (2019). Literature review of ethical concerns in the use of disruptive technologies in government 3.0. Icds, 85–93.
- Rousseau, D. M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R. S., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1998.926617
- Schmidt, T., Philipsen, R., Themann, P., & Ziefle, M. (2016). Public perception of v2x- technology-evaluation of general advantages, disadvantages and reasons for data sharing with connected vehicles. In 2016 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) (pp. 1344–1349). IEEE.
- Schomakers, E. M., Lidynia, C., & Ziefle, M. (2020). All of me? Users’ preferences for privacy- preserving data markets and the importance of anonymity. Electronic Markets, 30(3), 649–665. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-020-00404-9
- Schomakers, E.-M., Lidynia, C., Müllmann, D., Matzutt, R., Wehrle, K., Ziefle, M., & Ziefle, M. (2021). Insights on data sensitivity from the technical, legal and the users’ perspectives—practical suggestions on how to raise more awareness for the assumed exercise of informational self-determination. Computer Law Review International, 22(1), 8–15. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.9785/cri-2021-220103
- Schomakers, E.-M., Lidynia, C., Müllmann, D., & Ziefle, M. (2019). Internet users’ perceptions of information sensitivity – Insights from Germany. International Journal of Information Management, 46(November 2018), 142–150. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.11.018
- Shibl, R., Lawley, M., & Debuse, J. (2013). Factors influencing decision support system acceptance. Decision Support Systems, 54(2), 953–961. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.09.018.
- Silverio-Fernández, M., Renukappa, S., & Suresh, S. (2018). What is a smart device? - a conceptualisation within the paradigm of the internet of things. Visualization in Engineering, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1186/s40327-018-0063-8
- Skov, M. B., Johansen, P. G., Skov, C. S., & Lauberg, A. (2015). No news is good news: Remote monitoring of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients. Health sensors & monitoring, chi 2015.
- Smith, H. J., Dinev, T., & Xu, H. (2011). Information privacy research: An interdisciplinary review. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 989–1015. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/41409970
- Spiekermann, S., & Novotny, A. (2015). A vision for global privacy bridges: Technical and legal measures for international data markets. Computer Law and Security Review, 31(2), 181–200. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2015.01.009
- Sun, Y., Wang, N., Shen, X.-L., & Zhang, J. X. (2015). Location information disclosure in location-based social network services: Privacy calculus, benefit structure, and gender differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 52(August), 278–292. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.006
- Svendsen, G. B., Johnsen, J. A. K., Almås-Sørensen, L., & Vittersø, J. (2013). Personality and technology acceptance: The influence of personality factors on the core constructs of the technology acceptance model. Behaviour & Information Technology, 32(4), 323–334. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2011.553740
- Taddicken, M. (2014). The ‘privacy paradox’ in the social web: The impact of privacy concerns, individual characteristics, and the perceived social relevance on different forms of self-disclosure. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(2), 248–273. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12052
- Trepte, S., Reinecke, L., Ellison, N. B., Quiring, O., Yao, M. Z., & Ziegele, M. (2017). A cross-cultural perspective on the privacy calculus. Social Media + Society, 3(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116688035
- Van Heek, J., Arning, K., & Ziefle, M. (2016). The surveillance society: Which factors form public acceptance of surveillance technologies? In Smart cities, green technologies, and intelligent transport systems (pp. 170–191). Springer.
- Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
- Venkatesh, V., Walton, S. M., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
- Wakefield, R. (2013). The influence of user affect in online information disclosure. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 22(2), 157–174. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2013.01.003
- Wilkowska, W., Offermann-van Heek, J., Colonna, L., & Ziefle, M. (2020). Two faces of privacy: Legal and human-centered perspectives of lifelogging applications in home environments. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 545–564). Springer, Cham
- Wilkowska, W., Ziefle, M., & Himmel, S. (2015). Perceptions of personal privacy in smart home technologies: Do user assessments vary depending on the research method? In International Conference on Human Aspects of Information Security, Privacy, and Trust (pp. 592–603). Springer, Cham.
- Xu, H., Dinev, T., Smith, H. J., & Hart, P. (2008). Examining the formation of individual’s privacy concerns: Toward an integrative view.
- Yao, M. Z., Rice, R. E., & Wallis, K. (2007). Predicting user concerns about online privacy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(5), 710–722. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20530
- Zaunbrecher, B. S., Arning, K., & Ziefle, M. (2018). The good, the bad and the ugly: Affect and its role for renewable energy acceptance. In SMARTGREENS 2018 - Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems, 2018- March(Smartgreens) (pp. 325–336).
- Ziefle, M., Halbey, J., & Kowalewski, S. (2016). Users willingness to share data on the internet: Perceived benefits and caveats. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Internet of Things and Big Data (IOTBD 2016) (pp. 255–265).
- Ziegler, S., Evequoz, E., & Huamani, A. M. P. (2019). The impact of the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) on future data business models: Toward a new paradigm and business opportunities. Digital business models, 201–226.