Tüketicilerin Sosyal Medyada Yer Alan Kişisel Verilerinin İşletmeler Tarafından Kullanılmasına Yönelik Rahatlık Algısını Etkileyen Faktörler

Amaç – Çalışmanın temel amacı, tüketicilerin sosyal medyada paylaştıkları kişisel bilgilerin (kamuya açıklanmış bilgiler) işletmeler tarafından pazarlama amaçlı (hedefli reklamcılık, müşteri ilişkileri ve veri madenciliği) kullanılmasına yönelik hissettikleri rahatlık algısını incelemektir. Yöntem – Çalışmada kolayda örnekleme yöntemi uygulanmış olup, araştırma verileri facebook üzerinden toplanmıştır. Veriler SmartPLS programı kullanılarak yapısal eşitlik modellemesi ve önem-performans haritası analizleri ile test edilmiştir. Bulgular – Araştırma sonucunda, sosyal medyaya yönelik algılanan riskin, medyada paylaşılan kişisel bilgilerin işletmeler tarafından pazarlama amacıyla kullanmasına yönelik pazarlama rahatlık algısını negatif yönde ve anlamlı olarak etkilediği saptanmıştır. Sosyal medyaya yönelik algılanan faydanın, pazarlama rahatlık algısını pozitif yönde ve anlamlı etkilediği, fakat kendini açıklamanın pazarlama rahatlık algısı üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi olmadığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Tartışma – Çalışmada en büyük etki düzeyine sahip olan algılanan fayda değişkeni önem-performans haritası analizi ile daha derinlemesine incelenmiştir. Yapılan analiz sonucuna göre tüketiciler, yeni insanları tanımanın ve bu platformlarda ilişkilerini genişletmenin yararları nedeniyle, sosyal medyadaki kişisel verilerinin işletmeler tarafından kullanılması konusunda kendilerini rahat hissetmektedirler.

The Factors Effecting Perceived Comfort about use of Consumers’ Personal Data on Social Media by Companies)

Purpose – The main purpose of this study was to investigate the individual’s comfort that was felt about use the their information posted (information posted publicly) on social media by companies for marketing purposes (targeted advertising, customer relationships, and opinion mining). Design/methodology/approach – In this study, convenience sampling method was applied and research data were collected via facebook. The data were analyzed by using SmartPLS statistic program and the model were tested through the partial least squares-based structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) analysis and importance-performance map analysis (IPMA). Findings – The results show that perceived risk towards social media has negative effects on marketing comfort that consumers feel about the use of their social media data by companies for marketing purposes. Perceived benefit toward social media has positive effects on the perception of marketing comfort while self-disclosure doesn’t have significant effect on perception of marketing comfort. Discussion – The perceived benefit variable, which has the greatest effect level, was examined in more detail with IPMA. The results of analysis indicate that consumers feel comfortable about the use of their social media data by companies, because of the benefits of recognizing new people and expanding their relationships on social media platforms.

___

  • Akar, E. and Topçu, B. (2011). An examination of the factors influencing consumers' attitudes toward social media marketing, Journal of Internet Commerce, 10(1): 35-67.
  • Barth, S. and De Jong, M. D. (2017). The privacy paradox–Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior–A systematic literature review, Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1038-1058.
  • Barth, S., De Jong, M. D., Junger, M., Hartel, P. H. and Roppelt, J. C. (2019). Putting the privacy paradox to the test: Online privacy and security behaviors among users with technical knowledge, privacy awareness, and financial resources, Telematics and Informatics, 41, 55-69.
  • Bateman, P. J., Jacquelıne P. C. and Burian B. (2011). To disclose or not: Publicness in social networking sites, Information Technology & People, 24(1): 78-100.
  • Boyd, D. M. and Ellıson N.B. (2007). Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13(1): 210-230.
  • Chang, C. W. and Heo, J. (2014). Visiting theories that predict college students’ self-disclosure on Facebook, Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 79-86.
  • Chang, T. S. and Hsiao, W. H. (2014). Time spent on social networking sites: Understanding user behavior and social capital, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 31(1), 102-114.
  • Cheng-Yu, L. and Heng-Lı, Y.L. (2015). Determinants of individuals’ self-disclosure and instant information sharing behavior in micro-blogging, New Media & Society, 17(9): 1454-1472.
  • Cheung, C., Lee, Z. W. Y. and Chan, T. K. H. (2015). Self-disclosure in social networking sites: The role of perceived cost, perceived benefits and social influence, Internet Research: 25(2), 279-299.
  • Chıld, J. T. and Westermann, D. A. (2013), Let's be Facebook friends: Exploring parental facebook friend requests from a communication privacy management (CPM) perspective, Journal of Family Communication, 13(1): 46-59.
  • Choi, T. R. and Sung, Y. (2018). Instagram versus snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media, Telematics and Informatics, 35(8): 2289-2298.
  • Culnan, M. J. and Armstrong, P. K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation, Organization Science, 10(1), 104-115.
  • De Vries, L., Gensler, S. and Leeflang, P.S. (2012). Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: An investigation of the effects of social media marketing, Journal of İnteractive Marketing, 26(2): 83-91.
  • Dıgıtal 2019. https://www.slideshare.net/DataReportal/digital-2019-turkey-january-2019-v01(Erişim Tarihi: 10.09.2019).
  • DMA, 2018. Data privacy: What the consumer really thinks. The Direct Marketing Association. https://dma.org.uk/uploads/ misc/5a8 57c4fd f846-data-privacy—what-the-consumer-really-thinks-final_5a857c4fdf799.pdf. (Erişim Tarihi 10.09.2019).
  • Ellıson, N. B., Steınfıeld, C. and Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends: ” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4): 1143- 1168.
  • Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1): 39-50.
  • Fornell, C., Johnson, M. D., Anderson, E. W., Cha, J. and Bryant, B. E. (1996). The american customer satisfaction index: Nature, purpose, and findings, Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 7-18.
  • Gruzd, A. and Hernández-García, Á. (2018). Privacy concerns and self-disclosure in private and public uses of social media, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 21(7): 418-428.
  • Haır, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle C. M. and Siegfried G. P. (2018). Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  • He, W., Zha, S. and Li L. (2013). Social media competitive analysis and text mining: A case study in the pizza industry, International Journal of Information Management, 33(3): 464-472.
  • Huang, H. Y. (2016). Examining the beneficial effects of individual's self-disclosure on the social network site, Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 122-132.
  • Hui, K. L., Tan, B. C. and Goh, C.Y. (2006). Online information disclosure: Motivators and measurements. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT), 6(4): 415-441.
  • Jacobson, J., Gruzd, A. and Hernández-García, Á. (2019). Social media marketing: Who is watching the watchers? Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services.
  • Kannan, P. K. and Li, H. A. (2017). Digital marketing: A framework, review and research agendai, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 22-45.
  • Kaplan, A.M. and Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social Media, Business Horizons, 53(1): 59-68.
  • Kim, A. J., and Ko, E. (2010), Impacts of luxury fashion brand’s social media marketing on customer relationship and purchase intention, Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 1(3):164-171.
  • Kim, J., Kang, S., and Lee, K. H. (2019). Evolution of digital marketing communication: Bibliometric analysis and network visualization from key articles, Journal of Business Research.
  • Krasnova, H., Spiekermann, S., Koroleva, K. and Hildebrand, T. (2010). Online social networks: Why we disclose, Journal of İnformation Technology, 25(2): 109-125.
  • Laufer, R. S., and Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a concept and a social issue: A multidimensional developmental theory, Journal of social Issues, 33(3), 22-42.
  • Lin, R. and Utz, S. (2017). Self-disclosure on SNS: Do disclosure ıntimacy and narrativity influence ınterpersonal closeness and social attraction?, Computers in Human Behavior, 70: 426-436.
  • Liu, X., Burns, A.C., and Hou, Y. (2017), An investigation of brand-related user-generated content on twitter, Journal of Advertising, 46(2): 236-247.
  • Mcnealy, J. and Mullis, M. D. (2019). Tea and turbulence: Communication privacy management theory and online celebrity gossip forums, Computers in Human Behavior, 92: 110-118.
  • Morosan, C., and DeFranco, A. (2015). Disclosing personal information via hotel apps: A privacy calculus perspective, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 47, 120-130.
  • Ortiz, J., Chih, W. H., and Tsai, F. S. (2018). Information privacy, consumer alienation, and lurking behavior in social networking sites, Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 143-157.
  • Osatuyi, B. (2015). Empirical examination of information privacy concerns instrument in the social media context, AIS Transactions on Replication Research, 1(3): 1-14.
  • Petronio, S. (2004). Road to developing communication privacy management theory: narrative in progress, please stand by, Journal of Family Communication, 4(3-4), 193-207.
  • Petronio, S. (2013), Brief status report on communication privacy management theory, Journal of Family Communication, 13(1): 6-14.
  • Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J. and Burke, S.J. (1996). Information privacy: Measuring individuals' concerns about organizational practices, MIS Quarterly:167-196.
  • Stewart, K. A. and Segars, A. H. (2002), An empirical examination of the concern for information privacy instrument, Information Systems Research, 13(1): 36-49.
  • 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.
  • Tarakçı, İ. E., ve Mehmet, B. A. Ş. (2019). Pazarlama iletişiminde sosyal medya kullanımı: Amaçlar ve motivasyonlar, Euroasia Journal, 167.
  • Waters, S. and Ackerman, J. (2011). Exploring privacy management on Facebook: Motivations and perceived consequences of voluntary disclosure, Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 17(1): 101-115.
  • Wheeless, L. R. (1976). Self‐disclosure and interpersonal solidarity: Measurement, Validation, and Relationships, Human Communication Research, 3(1): 47-61.
  • Wu, K.W., Huang, S.Y., Yen, D.C. and Popova, I. (2012). The effect of online privacy policy on consumer privacy concern and trust, Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3): 889-897.
  • Xie, W., and Karan, K. (2019). Consumers’ privacy concern and privacy protection on social network sites in the era of big data: Empirical evidence from college students, Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1-15.