Privacy Risk Perceptions and Privacy Protection Strategies

Several opinion polls have reported that many people claim to be concerned about their privacy, yet that most people in fact do very little to protect their privacy. Are privacy concerns indeed insufficient motivators to adopt privacy protection strategies? What then characterizes the users of these strategies? On the basis of a large scale survey amongst Dutch students, this paper explores the relation between privacy risk perception and privacy protection strategies in more detail. It elaborates on factors that constitute privacy risk perception, as well as three kinds of strategies adopted by individuals to protect their privacy: behavioral measures, common privacy enhancing technologies (PETs), and more complex PETs. Next, it explores the relation between the respondents’ perception and the strategies they employ in more detail to answer the question what characteristics the users of the various strategies have in terms of perception, gender and age. Gender appears not to influence privacy risk perception, yet men are more familiar with the various privacy protection strategies and use them more of-ten than women. In general, a higher privacy risk perception does not lead to the adoption of stronger or more protection strategies, except for the use of pseudonyms, cookie crunchers, anonymous email, safe email, and providing false personal data. Our analysis deepens the understanding of privacy risk perception and privacy protection strategies, yet leaves the privacy paradox unresolved.

[1]  Roy Coleman The new politics of surveillance and visibility. , 2007 .

[2]  Lucas D. Introna,et al.  Privacy in the Information Age: Stakeholders, Interests and Values , 1999, Journal of business ethics : JBE.

[3]  Robert Boguslaw,et al.  Privacy and Freedom , 1968 .

[4]  Gary T.Marx 4. Varieties of Personal Information as Influences on Attitudes towards Surveillance , 2005 .

[5]  A. Joinson,et al.  Development of measures of online privacy concern and protection for use on the Internet , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  Daniel J. Solove,et al.  Identity Theft, Privacy, and the Architecture of Vulnerability , 2003 .

[7]  D. Hinkle,et al.  Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[8]  Julie Pallant,et al.  SPSS survival manual : a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows , 2001, Behaviour Change.

[9]  R. Turner,et al.  Self, collective behavior and society : essays honoring the contributions of Ralph H. Turner , 1994 .

[10]  Tomaz Klobucar,et al.  Privacy-Enhancing Technologies - approaches and development , 2003, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[11]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[12]  Gary T. Marx,et al.  A Tack in the Shoe: Neutralizing and Resisting the New Surveillance , 2003 .

[13]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis , 1992 .

[14]  Judith Donath,et al.  Public Displays of Connection , 2004 .

[15]  Judee K. Burgoon,et al.  Maintaining and Restoring Privacy through Communication in Different Types of Relationships , 1989 .

[16]  Felix Stalder,et al.  The Failure of Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs) and the Voiding of Privacy , 2002 .

[17]  D. Lyon Globalizing Surveillance , 2004 .