Understanding the role of equity in leveraging privacy concerns of consumers in ecommerce

Since ecommerce requires individuals to disclose their personal information, an issue of information privacy becomes an impediment towards its adoption. However, a paradox exists whereby individuals claim privacy concerns, yet act contrarily by using ecommerce. Our research aims to investigate the reasoning behind individuals use of ecommerce, despite claiming concerns for their information privacy. Based on previous findings, we argue that consumers undergo a calculation of equal benefits in conducting business with online firms, where they agree to firms utilizing their personal information as long as they retain control over its usage. This paper is a research-in-progress, and as such, our future work would be to validate our argument by collecting and empirically analyzing individuals responses with regards to ecommerce use. We expect that our paper would contribute by better understanding the conditions in which individuals disclose or withhold personal information.

[1]  J. S. Adams,et al.  Inequity In Social Exchange , 1965 .

[2]  France Bélanger,et al.  Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: the role of privacy, security, and site attributes , 2002, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[3]  Wallace A. Wood,et al.  Situational determinants of software piracy: An equity theory perspective , 1996 .

[4]  Kailash Joshi,et al.  The Measurement of Fairness or Equality Perceptions of Management Information Systems Users , 1989, MIS Q..

[5]  Jessica Vitak,et al.  Digital footprints: online identity management and search in the age of transparency , 2007 .

[6]  Daniel R. Horne,et al.  The Privacy Paradox: Personal Information Disclosure Intentions versus Behaviors , 2007 .

[7]  Naresh K. Malhotra,et al.  Internet Users' Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model , 2004, Inf. Syst. Res..

[8]  Sung S. Kim,et al.  Internet Users' Information Privacy-Protective Responses: A Taxonomy and a Nomological Model , 2008, MIS Q..

[9]  Varun Gauri,et al.  Principal–Agent Perspective , 2020 .

[10]  Joseph Gray Jackson,et al.  Privacy and Freedom , 1968 .

[11]  R. Mason Four ethical issues of the information age , 1986 .

[12]  Heng Xu,et al.  Information Privacy Research: An Interdisciplinary Review , 2011, MIS Q..

[13]  H. Jeff Smith,et al.  Information Privacy: Measuring Individuals' Concerns About Organizational Practices , 1996, MIS Q..

[14]  Mayuram S. Krishnan,et al.  The Personalization Privacy Paradox: An Empirical Evaluation of Information Transparency and the Willingness to be Profiled Online for Personalization , 2006, MIS Q..

[15]  Paul A. Pavlou,et al.  Understanding and Mitigating Uncertainty in Online Exchange Relationships: A Principal-Agent Perspective , 2007, MIS Q..

[16]  P. Pavlou,et al.  Understanding and Mitigating Uncertainty in Online Environments: A Principal-Agent Perspective , 2006 .

[17]  Hock-Hai Teo,et al.  The Value of Privacy Assurance: An Exploratory Field Experiment , 2007, MIS Q..

[18]  Alessandro Acquisti,et al.  Privacy in electronic commerce and the economics of immediate gratification , 2004, EC '04.

[19]  M. Culnan,et al.  Information Privacy Concerns, Procedural Fairness, and Impersonal Trust: An Empirical Investigation , 1999 .

[20]  Hong-Ling Yang,et al.  Concern for Information Privacy and Intention to Transact Online , 2008, 2008 4th International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing.

[21]  Rathindra Sarathy,et al.  The role of affect and cognition on online consumers' decision to disclose personal information to unfamiliar online vendors , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[22]  Tamara Dinev,et al.  An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions , 2006, Inf. Syst. Res..