Esra ÜNAL YEŞİLYURT

23330

The Privacy Paradox Is Not Real

Privacy paradox is the term used to describe the discrepancy between people's claimed privacy preferences and their actual actions towards the security of their personal information. Surveys show that despite increased privacy concerns, consumers frequently voluntarily divulge their personal information without taking the necessary precautions to secure it. The article makes the case that the privacy paradox may not always exist and that people's beliefs and behaviors surrounding privacy may not always coincide due to a number of issues, such as individualized perceptions of privacy and the complexity of risk assessment. The article investigates alternative causes for the observed inconsistencies and critically evaluates various viewpoints on the privacy dilemma. It underlines how important it is to take decision-making processes into account when making decisions and suggests that privacy laws and regulations be changed to take these considerations into account. The article concludes that to create efficient privacy protection mechanisms, it is essential to comprehend the multidimensional nature of privacy and the underlying motivations behind people's activities.
Anahtar Kelimeler:

privacy paradox, privacy preferences, risk assessment, decision-making processes, privacy laws, privacy protection mechanisms

THE PRIVACY PARADOX IS NOT REAL

Privacy paradox is the term used to describe the discrepancy between people's claimed privacy preferences and their actual actions towards the security of their personal information. Surveys show that despite increased privacy concerns, consumers frequently voluntarily divulge their personal information without taking the necessary precautions to secure it. The article makes the case that the privacy paradox may not always exist and that people's beliefs and behaviors surrounding privacy may not always coincide due to a number of issues, such as individualized perceptions of privacy and the complexity of risk assessment. The article investigates alternative causes for the observed inconsistencies and critically evaluates various viewpoints on the privacy dilemma. It underlines how important it is to take decision-making processes into account when making decisions and suggests that privacy laws and regulations be changed to take these considerations into account. The article concludes that to create efficient privacy protection mechanisms, it is essential to comprehend the multidimensional nature of privacy and the underlying motivations behind people's activities.
Keywords:

privacy paradox, privacy preferences, risk assessment, decision-making processes, privacy laws, privacy protection mechanisms,

PDF

___

  • Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2005). Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security Privacy, 3(1), 26-33. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2005.22
  • Acquisti, A., Taylor, C., & Wagman, L. (2016). The Economics of Privacy. Journal of Economic Literature, 54(2), 442-492. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.54.2.442
  • Barnes, S. B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v11i9.1394
  • Barth, S., D.T. de Jong, M., Junger, M., Hartel, P. H., & Roppelt, J. C. (t.y.). Putting the privacy paradox to the test_ Online privacy and security behaviors among users with technical knowledge, privacy awareness, and financial resources | Elsevier Enhanced Reader. Telematics and Informatics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.03.003
  • Brandimarte, L., Acquisti, A., & Loewenstein, G. (2013). Misplaced Confidences: Privacy and the Control Paradox. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(3), 340-347. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612455931
  • Brown, B. (2001). Studying the internet experience. Hewlett Packard. https://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2001/HPL-2001-49.pdf
  • Danezis, G., & Golle, P. (Ed.). (2006). Privacy enhancing technologies: 6th international workshop, PET 2006, Cambridge, UK, June 28-30, 2006: revised selected papers. Springer Dienlin, T., Masur, P. K., & Trepte, S. (2021). A longitudinal analysis of the privacy paradox. New Media & Society, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211016316
  • Federal Trade Commission. (2008). Protecting Consumers in the Next Tech-ade: A Report by the Staff of the Federal Trade Commission. A Report by the Staff of the Federal Trade Commission, 50.
  • Francis, J. G., & Francis, L. (2017). Privacy: What everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press.
  • 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/10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002
  • Grossklags, J., & Acquisti, A. (t.y.). When 25 Cents is too much: An Experiment on Willingness-To-Sell and Willingness-To-Protect Personal Information. 22 Hargittai, E., & Marwick, A. (2016). “What Can I Really Do?” Explaining the Privacy Paradox with Online Apathy. International Journal of Communication, 10(0), Art. 0.
  • Henkin, L. (1974). Privacy and Autonomy. Columbia Law Review, 74(8), 1410-1433. https://doi.org/10.2307/1121541
  • Hoffmann, C. P., Lutz, C., & Ranzini, G. (2016). Privacy cynicism: A new approach to the privacy paradox. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 10(4), Art. 4. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2016-4-7
  • Josephson, M. S. (t.y.). Miller: The Assault on Privacy. Michigan Law Review, 69, 10.
  • Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002
  • Lim, S. (2021). Tackling Privacy Paradox: Protecting Right to Self-determination of Personal Information by Estimating the Economic Value of Personal Information and Visualizing the Price. International Journal of Internet, Broadcasting and Communication, 13(2), 244-259. https://doi.org/10.7236/IJIBC.2021.13.2.244
  • Martin, K., & Nissenbaum, H. (2017). Measuring Privacy: An Empirical Test Using Context to Expose Confounding Variables. Columbia Science & Technology Law Review, 18, 176-218.
  • McDonald, A. M., & Cranor, L. F. (2008). The Cost of Reading Privacy Policies. I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 4, 543.
  • McGeveran, W. (2015). The Law of Friction. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 2013(1).
  • 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x
  • Parker, R. B. (1973). A Definition of Privacy. Rutgers Law Review, 27(2), 275-297.
  • Posner, R. A. (1978). Privacy, Secrecy, and Reputation. Buffalo Law Review, 28(1), 1-56.
  • Rachels, J. (1975). Why Privacy is Important. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 4(4), 323-333. Sloot, B. van der. (2021). The right to be let alone by oneself: Narrative and identity in a data-driven environment. Law, Innovation and Technology, 13(1), 223-255. https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2021.1898315 Solove, D. (2020). The Myth of the Privacy Paradox. GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works.
  • Solove, D. J. (2008). Understanding privacy. Harvard University Press.
  • Spiekermann, S., Grossklags, J., & Berendt, B. (t.y.). E-privacy in 2nd generation E-commerce | Proceedings of the 3rd ACM conference on Electronic Commerce.
  • Strahilevitz, L., & Kugler, M. (2016). Is Privacy Policy Language Irrelevant to Consumers? The Journal of Legal Studies, 45, S69-S95. https://doi.org/10.1086/689933
  • Tsai, J. Y., Egelman, S., Cranor, L., & Acquisti, A. (2011). The Effect of Online Privacy Information on Purchasing Behavior: An Experimental Study. Information Systems Research, 22(2), 254-268. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1090.0260
  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
  • Vaidhyanathan, S. (2012). The Googlization of everything: And why we should worry. University of California press.
  • Westin, A. F. (1968). Privacy and freedom. The Washington and Lee Law Review, 25(1).
Kişisel Verileri Koruma Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 2667-6524
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 2 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2019
  • Yayıncı: Kişisel Verileri Koruma Kurumu
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Yüz Tanıma Teknolojilerinin Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Hukuku Açısından İncelenmesi

Sertel ŞIRACI

AB ve Türk Hukukunda Veri İhlalinin Tespiti ve Bildirim Süresinin Karşılaştırmalı Değerlendirmesi

Nur Sena SEVİNDİ, Muhammet Emin ORDU

6698 Sayılı Kanun’a Uyumlu Yazılımların Geliştirilmesi ve Yapay Zekâ Uygulamaları

Erhan ÖZKAN

The Privacy Paradox Is Not Real

Esra ÜNAL YEŞİLYURT