"Who should I grant access to my post?": Identifying the most suitable privacy decisions on online social networks

PurposeOnline social networks (OSNs) provide users with mechanisms such as social circles and individual selection to define the audiences (i.e., privacy policy) of the shared information. This privacy decision-making process is a hard and tedious task for users because they have to assess the cost-benefit in a complex environment. Moreover, little is known about how users assess the cost-benefit of matching the elements of online communication and their interests. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to develop and test a research model to understand the impact that the types of receivers and the sensitivity of messages have on privacy decisions.Design/methodology/approachA study was conducted to understand how users evaluate the cost-benefit of the disclosure action in online social networks for the different types of receivers identified and the sensitivity of the message. Data from 400 respondents was collected and analyzed using partial least squares modeling.FindingsThe findings of this study demonstrated a trade-off variance between the perceived cost-benefit and the disclosure of sensitive information with different receiver types. Disclosing personal information with trusted receivers, influencer receivers and receivers from the circle of coworkers had a positive significant effect on social capital building. Conversely, disclosing personal information with receivers from the circle of family or unknown receivers had a significant negative effect on social capital building and even a significant positive effect on privacy concerns.Originality/valueRecent literature has documented the increasing interest of the research community in understanding users' concerns and interests in making the most suitable privacy decisions. However, most researchers have worked on understanding the disclosure action from a user-centered perspective and have not considered all of the elements of online communication. This study puts the focus on all of the elements of communication during disclosure actions, taking into account the properties of the message and receivers and the impact on users' cost benefit value.

[1]  Elena del Val Noguera,et al.  Empowering Users Regarding the Sensitivity of their Data in Social Networks through Nudge Mechanisms , 2020, HICSS.

[2]  Kerk F. Kee,et al.  Being Immersed in Social Networking Environment: Facebook Groups, Uses and Gratifications, and Social Outcomes , 2009, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[3]  N. Kock.  Common Method Bias in PLS-SEM: A Full Collinearity Assessment Approach , 2015, Int. J. e Collab..

[4]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error , 1981 .

[5]  Shelly L. Gable,et al.  What do you do when things go right? The intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing positive events. , 2004, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Information diffusion and external influence in networks , 2012, KDD.

[7]  Enrique Bonsón,et al.  Influence of trust and perceived value on the intention to purchase travel online: Integrating the effects of assurance on trust antecedents , 2015 .

[8]  V. Derlega,et al.  Privacy and self-disclosure in social relationships. , 1977 .

[9]  Dmitri Williams,et al.  On and Off the 'Net: Scales for Social Capital in an Online Era , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[10]  Lawrence R. Wheeless,et al.  Conceptualization and Measurement of Reported Self-Disclosure. , 1976 .

[11]  Michael L. Kasavana,et al.  Online social networking: redefining the human web , 2010 .

[12]  Dong Liu,et al.  Self-disclosure on social networking sites, positive feedback, and social capital among Chinese college students , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[13]  Rediet Abebe.  Can Cascades be Predicted? , 2014 .

[14]  A. Galeotti,et al.  Influencing the influencers: a theory of strategic diffusion , 2009 .

[15]  Yongqiang Sun,et al.  Location information disclosure in location-based social network services: Privacy calculus, benefit structure, and gender differences , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[16]  P. Bourdieu.  Forms of Capital , 2002 .

[17]  Yang Wang,et al.  "I regretted the minute I pressed share": a qualitative study of regrets on Facebook , 2011, SOUPS.

[18]  Feng-Yang Kuo,et al.  Can Blogging Enhance Subjective Well-Being Through Self-Disclosure? , 2009, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[19]  Hock-Hai Teo,et al.  Research Note - Effects of Individual Self-Protection, Industry Self-Regulation, and Government Regulation on Privacy Concerns: A Study of Location-Based Services , 2012, Inf. Syst. Res..

[20]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Privacy and human behavior in the age of information , 2015, Science.

[21]  Yi Wu,et al.  Love at First Sight: The Interplay Between Privacy Dispositions and Privacy Calculus in Online Social Connectivity Management , 2018, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  The Benefits of Facebook "Friends: " Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[23]  Hyejin Park,et al.  Why do people share their context information on Social Network Services? A qualitative study and an experimental study on users' behavior of balancing perceived benefit and risk , 2013, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[24]  Nicole B. Ellison,et al.  ‘There’s a network out there you might as well tap’: Exploring the benefits of and barriers to exchanging informational and support-based resources on Facebook , 2013, New Media Soc..

[25]  Anna Cinzia Squicciarini,et al.  PriMa: a comprehensive approach to privacy protection in social network sites , 2014, Ann. des Télécommunications.

[26]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Posting, commenting, and tagging: Effects of sharing news stories on Facebook , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[27]  Bo Xiao,et al.  Embarrassing Exposures in Online Social Networks: An Integrated Perspective of Privacy Invasion and Relationship Bonding , 2015, Inf. Syst. Res..

[28]  Jenny L. Davis,et al.  Context collapse: theorizing context collusions and collisions , 2014 .

[29]  Jose M. Such,et al.  Photo Privacy Conflicts in Social Media: A Large-scale Empirical Study , 2017, CHI.

[30]  Holly Schiffrin,et al.  The Associations among Computer-Mediated Communication, Relationships, and Well-being , 2010, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[31]  I. Nonaka.  A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation , 1994 .

[32]  Katie M. Edwards,et al.  Disclosure of Intimate Partner Violence to Informal Social Support Network Members , 2014, Trauma, violence & abuse.

[33]  Alex Bennet,et al.  The Decision-Making Process in a Complex Situation , 2008 .

[34]  Jun Heo,et al.  Visiting theories that predict college students' self-disclosure on Facebook , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[35]  Natalya N. Bazarova.  Public Intimacy: Disclosure Interpretation and Social Judgments on Facebook , 2012 .

[36]  L. Tidwell,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communication Effects on Disclosure, Impressions, and Interpersonal Evaluations: Getting to Know One Another a Bit at a Time , 2002 .

[37]  Ned Kock,et al.  A Note on How to Conduct a Factor-Based PLS-SEM Analysis , 2015, Int. J. e Collab..

[38]  Zhenhui Jiang,et al.  Research Note - Privacy Concerns and Privacy-Protective Behavior in Synchronous Online Social Interactions , 2013, Inf. Syst. Res..

[39]  A. Acquisti,et al.  Beyond the Turk: Alternative Platforms for Crowdsourcing Behavioral Research , 2016 .

[40]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[41]  Anabel Quan-Haase,et al.  Uses and Gratifications of Social Media: A Comparison of Facebook and Instant Messaging , 2010 .

[42]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[43]  Zach W. Y. Lee,et al.  Self-disclosure in social networking sites: The role of perceived cost, perceived benefits and social influence , 2015, Internet Res..

[44]  James W. Pennebaker,et al.  Sharing One's Story: On the Benefits of Writing or Talking About Emotional Experience , 2009 .

[45]  Xiao-Liang Shen,et al.  Consumers' decisions in social commerce context: An empirical investigation , 2015, Decis. Support Syst..

[46]  B. Wellman,et al.  Different Strokes from Different Folks: Community Ties and Social Support , 1990, American Journal of Sociology.

[47]  Rui Chen,et al.  An investigation of email processing from a risky decision making perspective , 2011, Decis. Support Syst..

[48]  Melanie Nguyen,et al.  Comparing Online and Offline Self-Disclosure: A Systematic Review , 2012, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[49]  Dan J. Kim,et al.  An investigation of a dynamic model of privacy trade-off in use of mobile social network applications: A longitudinal perspective , 2019, Decis. Support Syst..

[50]  Sarah Spiekermann,et al.  Online social networks: why we disclose , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[51]  Cory R. A. Hallam,et al.  Online self-disclosure: The privacy paradox explained as a temporally discounted balance between concerns and rewards , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[52]  Elena del Val Noguera,et al.  Estimation of privacy risk through centrality metrics , 2018, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[53]  Heng Xu,et al.  Examining the Formation of Individual's Privacy Concerns: Toward an Integrative View , 2008, ICIS.

[54]  ChenJun,et al.  Consumers' decisions in social commerce context , 2015 .

[55]  H. Raghav Rao,et al.  A trust-based consumer decision-making model in electronic commerce: The role of trust, perceived risk, and their antecedents , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[56]  Bashar Nuseibeh,et al.  Adaptive Sharing for Online Social Networks: A Trade-off Between Privacy Risk and Social Benefit , 2014, 2014 IEEE 13th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications.

[57]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Empirical foundations for writing in prevention and psychotherapy: mental and physical health outcomes. , 1999, Clinical psychology review.

[58]  Seongcheol Kim,et al.  Factors influencing willingness to provide personal information for personalized recommendations , 2018, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[59]  Ravi Thambusamy,et al.  Privacy and pleasure: A paradox of the hedonic use of computer-mediated social networks , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[60]  Amandeep Dhir,et al.  Impact of privacy, trust and user activity on intentions to share Facebook photos , 2016, J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc..

[61]  Nana Li,et al.  Examining help requests on social networking sites: Integrating privacy perception and privacy calculus perspectives , 2020, Electron. Commer. Res. Appl..

[62]  Xi Chen,et al.  Factors affecting privacy disclosure on social network sites: an integrated model , 2010, Electronic Commerce Research.

[63]  Stefano Taddei,et al.  Privacy, trust and control: Which relationships with online self-disclosure? , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[64]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on twitter , 2011, WSDM '11.

[65]  Hsin-Yi Huang,et al.  Examining the beneficial effects of individual's self-disclosure on the social network site , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[66]  Natasha F. Veltri,et al.  Privacy Calculus on Social Networking Sites: Explorative Evidence from Germany and USA , 2010, 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[67]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[68]  Piper Liping Liu,et al.  Ties that work: Investigating the relationships among coworker connections, work-related Facebook utility, online social capital, and employee outcomes , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[69]  Mina J. Hanna,et al.  User Data Privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and Privacy Protection , 2018, Computer.