Nothing to hide, nothing to lose? Incentives and disincentives to sharing information with institutions online

References

• Anderson, C. L., & Agarwal, R. (2011). The digitization of healthcare: Boundary risks, emotion, and consumer willingness to disclose personal health information. Information Systems Research, 22(3), 469–490. doi: 10.1287/isre.1100.0335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrejevic, M. (2014). The big data divide. International Journal of Communication, 8, 1673–1689.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bansal, G., Zahedi, F. M., & Gefen, D. (2016). Do context and personality matter? Trust and privacy concerns in disclosing private information online. Information & Management, 53(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1016/j.im.2015.08.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, S. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9), Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1394 doi: 10.5210/fm.v11i9.1394
   Google Scholar
• Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
   Google Scholar
• Bonsón Ponte, E., Carvajal-Trujillo, E., & Escobar-Rodríguez, T. (2015). Influence of trust and perceived value on the intention to purchase travel online: Integrating the effects of assurance on trust antecedents. Tourism Management, 47, 286–302. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2014.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• boyd, d. (2010, March). Making sense of privacy and publicity. Presented at the South by Southwest Interactive Conference, Austin, TX. Retrieved from http://www.danah.org/papers/talks/2010/SXSW2010.html
   Google Scholar
• boyd, d. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bryce, J., & Fraser, J. (2014). The role of disclosure of personal information in the evaluation of risk and trust in young peoples’ online interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 299–306. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, H., Lee, J.-S., & Chung, S. (2010). Optimistic bias about online privacy risks: Testing the moderating effects of perceived controllability and prior experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 987–995. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christofides, E., Muise, A., & Desmarais, S. (2009). Information disclosure and control on Facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different processes? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(3), 341–345. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2008.0226
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Crain, M. (2016). The limits of transparency: Data brokers and commodification. New Media & Society, doi: 10.1177/1461444816657096
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Culnan, M. J. (1993). ‘How did they get my name?’: An exploratory investigation of consumer attitudes toward secondary information use. MIS Quarterly, 17, 341–363. doi: 10.2307/249775
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Culnan, M. J., & Armstrong, P. K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10(1), 104–115. doi: 10.1287/orsc.10.1.104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowd, M. (2010). Contextualised concerns: The online privacy attitudes of young adults. In S. Fischer-Hübner, P. Duquenoy, M. Hansen, R. Leenes, & G. Zhang (Eds.), Privacy and identity management for life (Vol. 352, pp. 78–89). Trento: Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-20769-3_7
   Google Scholar
• Duggan, M. (2015, August 19). Mobile messaging and Social Media 2015. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/19/mobile-messaging-and-social-media-2015/
   Google Scholar
• Gefen, D. (2000). E-commerce: The role of familiarity and trust. Omega, 28(6), 725–737. doi: 10.1016/S0305-0483(00)00021-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gross, R., & Acquisti, A. (2005). Information revelation and privacy in online social networks. In Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on privacy in the electronic society (pp. 71–80). New York, NY: ACM Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hargittai, E., & Marwick, A. (2016). ‘What can I really do?’ Explaining the privacy paradox with online apathy. International Journal of Communication, 10, 21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Homans, G. C. (1961). Human behavior: Its elementary forms. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace.
   Google Scholar
• Kokolakis, S. (2015). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167404815001017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., & Graepel, T. (2013). Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(15), 5802–5805. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1218772110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krasnova, H., Spiekermann, S., Koroleva, K., & Hildebrand, T. (2010). Online social networks: Why we disclose. Journal of Information Technology, 25(2), 109–125. doi: 10.1057/jit.2010.6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krueger, P. R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research, Second Edition. Sage (1994), Edition: 2nd, Paperback, 272 pages.
   Google Scholar
• Laufer, R. S., & Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a concept and a social issue: A multidimensional developmental theory. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 22–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01880.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, Y. (2011). Empirical studies on online information privacy concerns: Literature review and an integrative framework. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 28(1), 453–496.
   Google Scholar
• Li, H., Sarathy, R., & Xu, H. (2010). Understanding situational online information disclosure as a privacy calculus. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 51(1), 62–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litt, E. (2012). Knock, knock. Who’s there? The imagined audience. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(3), 330–345. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2012.705195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litt, E., & Hargittai, E. (2016). The imagined audience on social network sites. Social Media+Society, 2(1), doi: 10.1177/2056305116633482
   Google Scholar
• Luo, X. (2002). Trust production and privacy concerns on the Internet: A framework based on relationship marketing and social exchange theory. Industrial Marketing Management, 31(2), 111–118. doi: 10.1016/S0019-8501(01)00182-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A., & boyd, d. (2014). Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society, 16(7), 1051–1067. doi: 10.1177/1461444814543995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marwick, A., Murgia-Diaz, D., & Palfrey, J. (2010). Youth, privacy and reputation (literature review) (No. Berkman Center Research Publication No. 2010-5). Boston, MA: Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1588163
   Google Scholar
• Mills, J. (2015). The future of privacy in the surveillance age. In R. Goldfarb (Ed.), After Snowden: Privacy, secrecy, and security in the information age (pp. 193–251). New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Min, J., & Kim, B. (2015). How are people enticed to disclose personal information despite privacy concerns in social network sites? The calculus between benefit and cost. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66(4), 839–857. doi: 10.1002/asi.23206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nissenbaum, H. F. (2010). Privacy in context : technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: Personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavlou, P. A. (2011). State of the information privacy literature: Where are we now and where should we go? MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 977–988. doi: 10.2307/41409969
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phelps, J., Nowak, G., & Ferrell, E. (2000). Privacy concerns and consumer willingness to provide personal information. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 27–41. doi: 10.1509/jppm.19.1.27.16941
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raynes-Goldie, K. (2010). Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: Understanding privacy in the age of Facebook. First Monday, 15(1–4). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2775/2432
   Google Scholar
• Schneier, B. (2015). Data and Goliath: The hidden battles to collect your data and control your world (1st ed.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, H. J., Dinev, T., & Xu, H. (2011). Information privacy research: An interdisciplinary review. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 989–1016. doi: 10.2307/41409970
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solove, D. J. (2007). ‘I’ve got nothing to hide’ and other misunderstandings of privacy. San Diego Law Review, 44, 745.
   Google Scholar
• Solove, D. J. (2008). Understanding privacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Trepte, S., & Reinecke, L. (2011). Privacy online: Perspectives on privacy and self-disclosure in the social Web. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Tufekci, Z. (2012). Facebook, youth and privacy in networked publics. Presented at the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM12/paper/view/4668
   Google Scholar
• Turow, J. (2017). The Aisles have eyes: How retailers track your shopping, strip your privacy, and define your power. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turow, J., Hennessy, M., & Draper, N. (2015). The tradeoff fallacy: How marketers are misrepresenting American consumers and opening them up to exploitation. Philadelphia, PA: The Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved from https://www.asc.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/TradeoffFallacy_1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vickery, J. R. (2015). I don’t have anything to hide, but … ’: The challenges and negotiations of social and mobile media privacy for non-dominant youth. Information, Communication & Society, 18(3), 281–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.989251. (ahead-of-print)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vitak, J., Blasiola, S., Patil, S., & Litt, E. (2015). Balancing audience and privacy tensions on social network sites: Strategies of highly engaged users. International Journal of Communication, 9, 20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Y., & Midha, V. (2012). User self-disclosure on health social networks: A social exchange perspective. Presented at the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Orlando, FL, AIS. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2012/proceedings/ResearchInProgress/99/
   Google Scholar
• Woodruff, A., Pihur, V., Consolvo, S., Schmidt, L., Brandimarte, L., & Acquisti, A. (2014). Would a privacy fundamentalist sell their DNA for $1000 … If nothing bad happened as a result? The Westin categories, behavioral intentions, and consequences. In Proceedings of the tenth symposium on usable privacy and security. Menlo Park, CA: The USENIX Association. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/soups2014/soups14-paper-woodruff.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Young, A. L., & Quan-Haase, A. (2013). Privacy protection strategies on Facebook. Information, Communication & Society, 16(4), 479–500. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.777757
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar