Idée / dominante :

Dans le cadre de la théorie du CPM, les inquiétudes des internautes quant à la protection des leurs données personnelles sont fonction des risques et du contrôle individuel perçus. Les politiques d’autorégulation adoptées par les entreprises ont également une influence (indirecte) sur ces inquiétudes. Les labels, attribués par une partie tierce, ont, quant à eux, une influence non-significative (Hui et al. 2007).

Résumé :

Définie comme le droit, du point de vue juridique (Warren & Brandeis, 1890), à un état d’accès limité ou d’isolation, en philosophie/psychologie (Schoeman, 1984), et au contrôle, en sciences sociales et SI (Culnan, 1993 ; Westin, 1967), la « privacy » et les inquiétudes sous-jacentes sont ici étudiées à la lumière de la théorie du «Communication Privacy Management» (Petronio, 2002). Cette théorie vise à comprendre comment les individus prennent des décisions en ce qui concerne la diffusion d’information au sein de relations interpersonnelles. Elle repose sur la métaphore des frontières (ouvertes ou fermées, cf. IBT) régissant la diffusion des informations, et comprend trois niveaux : (1) la création d’un espace personnel d’information, avec des frontières définies. Ces frontières dépendent d’une évaluation des risques, de dispositions personnelles, et du contexte d’une relation avec une entité extérieure avec laquelle un échange d’informations a lieu. (2) Lorsqu’ils diffusent des informations, les individus considèrent que celles-ci sont conservées dans un domaine sûr, à la disposition des entreprises à la condition que celles-ci appliquent leurs politiques de protection de confidentialité. (3) Lorsqu’il y a violation de ces politiques, les individus ont recours à un tiers, en portant plainte auprès de l’institution compétente.

Grâce à cette théorie, les auteurs mettent en place un modèle de recherche qu’ils cherchent à valider au moyen d’un questionnaire soumis en ligne à des étudiants du sud des Etats-Unis. Ils ont récolté 823 réponses exploitables. Principaux enseignements de l’enquête :

• Les risques perçus pour la privacy ont une influence positive sur les inquiétudes (i.e. plus l’individu perçois des risques pour la confidentialité des ses informations, plus il sera inquiet) ;
• Le contrôle perçu sur la privacy a une influence négative sur les inquiétudes ;
• La propension d’un individu à attacher de l’importance à la privacy impacte la perception des risques, et, dans le cadre des réseaux sociaux, le contrôle ;
• Cette propension impacte positivement les inquiétudes ;
• L’efficacité perçue des politiques de protection des données impacte positivement la perception du contrôle, et négativement la perception du risque ;
• L’efficacité perçue de l’autorégulation des entreprises impacte positivement la perception du contrôle, à l’exception des sites de finance.Globalement : plus un individu attache de l’importance à la protection de ses données personnelles, plus celui-ci sera enclin à sentir une violation de sa « privacy».
  Fait marquant : les sites de réseaux sociaux se détachent des autres sites observés lors de l’analyse de coefficients et de leur variance. Ceux-ci ont notamment développé certains attributs permettant à leurs utilisateurs de gérer eux-mêmes leurs paramètres de confidentialité, ce qui impacte leur perception du contrôle de leurs informations. E.g. pour Friendster.com, la définition de ces paramètres fait partie intégrante du processus d’inscription.

Notes d’intérêt pour la recherche en cours :

Définition de la « privacy », présentation et utilisation de la théorie du « Communication Privacy Management » comme cadre théorique, singularité des réseaux sociaux en termes de gestion de la confidentialité, qui affecte la perception du contrôle.

Ce qui n’a pas été abordé :

L’échantillon considéré se limite aux étudiants, il conviendrait d’élargir cela. L’étude reste théorique et ne permet pas de dresser les conséquences de tels enseignements sur le comportement des internautes (et plus particulièrement des utilisateurs de réseaux sociaux) => Comment ces inquiétudes se traduisent dans l’utilisation du web ?

Références :

Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4), 665-694.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.

Altman, I. (1974). Privacy: A conceptual analysis. In D.H. Carson (Ed.), Man-Environment Interactions: Evaluations and Applications: Part 2 (3-28). Washington, DC.: Environmental Design Research Association.

Altman, I. (1977). Privacy regulation: Culturally universal or culturally specific? Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 66-84.

Belanger, F., Hiller, J.S., & Smith, W.J. (2002). Trustworthiness in electronic commerce: The role of privacy, security, and site attributes. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 11(3-4), 245-270.

Bellman, S., Johnson, E.J., Kobrin, S.J., & Lohse, G.L. (2004). International differences in informationprivacy concerns: A global survey of consumers. Information Society, 20(5), 313-324.

Benassi, P. (1999). TRUSTe: An online privacy seal program. Communications of the ACM, 42(2),56-59.

Bennett, C.J. (1992). Regulating privacy: Data protection and public policy in Europe and the UnitedStates. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Buchanan, T., Paine, C., Joinson, A. N., & Reips, U.-D. (2007). Development of measures of onlineprivacy concern and protection for use on the Internet. Journal of the American Society forInformation Science and Technology, 58(2), 157-165.

Campbell, D.T., & Fiske, D.W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105.

Chellappa, R.K., & Sin, R. (2005). Personalization versus privacy: An empirical examination of theonline consumer’s dilemma.Information Technology and Management, 6(2), 181-202.

Child, J.T., Pearson, J.C., & Petronio, S. (2009). Blogging, communication, and privacy management: Development of the blogging privacy management measure.Journal of the American Societyfor Information Science and Technology, 60(10), 2079-2094.

Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A.Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295-336). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cook, M., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for fieldsettings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Culnan, M.J. (1993). ‘How did they get my name’? An exploratory investigation of consumer attitudestoward secondary information use. MIS Quarterly, 17(3), 341-363.

Culnan, M.J. (1995). Consumer awareness of name removal procedures: Implication for directmarketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 9(2), 10-19.

Culnan, M.J. (2000). Protecting privacy online: Is self-regulation working? Journal of Public Policy andMarketing, 19(1), 20-26.

Culnan, M.J., & Armstrong, P.K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness andimpersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10(1), 104-115.

Culnan, M.J., & Bies, J.R. (2003). Consumer privacy: Balancing economic and justiceconsiderations. Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 323-342.

Culnan, M.J., & Williams, C.C. (2009). How ethics can enhance organizational privacy: Lessons fromthe ChoicePoint and TJX data breaches. MIS Quarterly, 33(4), 673-687.

Derlega, V.J., & Chaikin, A.L. (1977). Privacy and self-disclosure in social relationships. Journal ofSocial Issues, 33(3), 102-115.

Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2004). Internet privacy concerns and their antecedents – Measurement validityand a regression model. Behavior and Information Technology, 23(6), 413-423.

Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006a). An extended privacy calculus model for E-commerce transactions.Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61-80.

Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006b). Internet privacy concerns and social awareness as determinants ofintention to transact. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 10(2), 7-29.

Dinev, T., Hart, P., & Mullen, M.R. (2008). Internet privacy concerns and beliefs about governmentsurveillance – An empirical investigation. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(3), 214-233.

DMA. (2003). Privacy promise member compliance guide. Retrieved from http://www.the-dma.org/ privacy/privacypromise.shtml

Earp, J.B., Anton, A.I., Aiman-Smith, L., & Stufflebeam, W. H. (2005). Examining Internet privacy policies within the context of user privacy values. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 52(2), 227-237.

Earp, J.B., & Payton, F.C. (2006). Information privacy in the service sector: An exploratory study of health care and banking professionals. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 16(2), 105-122.

Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F.L. (1982). Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to consumer exit-voice theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 440-452.

Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58(2), 1-19.

Gefen, D. (2000). Lessons learnt from the successful adoption of an ERP: The central role of trust. In S. D. Zanakis, G. Zopounidis and C. Zopounidis (eds.), Recent Developments and Applications in Decision Making. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.

Gefen, D., Straub, D., & Boudreau, M. (2000). Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Communications of AIS, 4(1), 1-78.

Greenfield, Y.M.N.a. (2000). The Internet is ‘Big Man on Campus’—New study from Greenfield online reveals the Web is huge on campus. Retrieved from http://www8.techmall.com/techdocs/TS000807-2.html.

Gross, R., & Acquisti, A. (2005). Information revelation and privacy in online social networks. Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society, Alexandria, VA.

Hansell, S. (2008a, May 27). Google fights for the right to hide its privacy policy. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/27/google-fights-for-the-right-to- hide-its-privacy-policy/.

Hansell, S. (2008b, May 30). Is Google violating a California privacy law? The New York Times. Retrieved from http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/30/is-google-violating-a-california-privacy-law/.

Havlena, W.J., & DeSarbo, W.S. (1991). On the measurement of perceived consumer risk. DecisionSciences, 22(4), 927-939.

Hoadley, C.M., Xu, H., Lee, J.J., & Rosson, M.B. (2010). Privacy as information access and illusorycontrol: The case of the Facebook news feed privacy outcry. Electronic Commerce Researchand Applications, 9(1), 50-60.

Hoofnagle, C.J., King, J., Li, S., & Turow, J. (2010). How different are young adults from older adultswhen it comes to information privacy attitudes and policies?SSRN. Retrieved fromhttp://ssrn.com/abstract=1589864.

Hui, K.-L., Teo, H.H., & Lee, S.-Y.T. (2007). The value of privacy assurance: An exploratory fieldexperiment. MIS Quarterly, 31(1), 19-33.

Jarvenpaa, S.L., & Leidner, D.E. (1999). Communication and trust in global virtual teams.Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815.

Jensen, C., Potts, C., & Jensen, C. (2005). Privacy practices of Internet users: Self-reports versusobserved behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63(1-2), 203–227.

Kelvin, P. (1973). A social-psychological examination of privacy. British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 12(3), 248-261.

Kim, D., & Benbasat, I. (2006). The effects of trust-assuring arguments on consumer trust in Internetstores: application of Toulmin’s model of argumentation. Information Systems Research,17(3), 286-300.

Laufer, R.S., & Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a concept and a social issue – Multidimensionaldevelopmental theory. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 22-42.

Li, H., Sarathy, R., & Xu, H. (2010). Understanding situational online information disclosure as aprivacy calculus. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 51(1), 62-71.

Lindell, M.K., and Whitney, D.J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional

research designs, Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114-121.

Ma, M., & Agarwal, R. (2007). Through a glass darkly: Information technology design, identityverification, and knowledge contribution in online communities. Information SystemsResearch, 18(1), 42-67.

Malhotra, N.K., Kim, S.S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC):The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336-355.

Margulis, S.T. (1977). Conceptions of privacy: current status and next steps. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 5-21.

Margulis, S.T. (2003a). On the status and contribution of Westin’s and Altman’s theories of privacy. Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 411-429.

Margulis, S.T. (2003b). Privacy as a social issue and behavioral concept. Journal of Social Issues, 59(2), 243-261.

Mayer, R.C., Davis, J.H., & Schoorman, F.D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.

McKnight, D.H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for E- commerce: An integrative typology. Information Systems Research, 13(3), 334-359.

Metzger, M.J. (2004). Privacy, trust, and disclosure: exploring barriers to electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9(4).

Metzger, M.J. (2007). Communication privacy management in electronic commerce. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 335–361.

Milberg, S.J., Burke, S.J., Smith, H.J., & Kallman, E.A. (1995). Values, personal information privacy, and regulatory approaches. Communications of the ACM,38(12), 65-74.

Milne, G.R., & Boza, M.-E. (1999). Trust and concern in consumers’ perceptions of marketing information management practices. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13(1), 5-24.

Milne, G.R., & Culnan, M.J. (2004). Strategies for reducing online privacy risks: Why consumers read (or don’t read) online privacy notices. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 15-29.

Moon, Y. (2000). Intimate exchanges: Using computers to elicit self-disclosure from consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(4), 323-339.

Moores, T. (2005). Do consumers understand the role of privacy seals in e-commerce? Communications of the ACM, 48(3), 86-91.

Moores, T.T., & Dhillon, G. (2003). Do privacy seals in e-commerce really work? Communications of the ACM, 46(12), 265-271.

Norberg, P.A., & Horne, D.R. (2007). Privacy attitudes and privacy-related behavior. Psychology and Marketing, 24(10), 829-847.

Nunnally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed.. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Palen, L., & Dourish, P. (2003). Unpacking “privacy” for a networked world. Proceedings of theSIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Ft. Lauderdale, Fl., 129-136.

Pavlou, P.A., & Gefen, D. (2004). Building effective online marketplaces with institution-based trust.Information Systems Research, 15(1), 37-59.

Petronio, S.S. (2002). Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure (xix,pp. 268). Albany, NY: StateUniversity of New York Press.

PEW-Internet. (2008). Pew Internet & American life project: Demographics of Internet users. PEW,Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/User_Demo_10%2020%2008.htm.

Phelps, J., D’Souza, G., & Nowak, G.J. (2001). Antecedents and consequences of consumer privacyconcerns: An empirical investigation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(4), 2-17.

Phelps, J., Nowak, G., & Ferrell, E. (2000). Privacy concerns and consumer willingness to providepersonal information. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 19(1), 27-41.

Podsakoff, M.P., MacKenzie, B.S., Lee, J.Y., & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common method biases inbehavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903.

Schoeman, F.D. (Ed.). (1984). Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy: An Anthology. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.

Schwartz, P. M. (1999). Privacy and democracy in cyberspace. Vanderbilt Law Review, 52, 1610-1701.

Sheehan, K.B. (1999). An investigation of gender differences in on-line privacy concerns andresultant behaviors. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 13(4), 24-38.

Sheehan, K.B. (2002). Toward a typology of Internet users and online privacy concerns. InformationSociety, 18(1), 21-32.

Sheehan, K.B., & Hoy, M.G. (2000). Dimensions of privacy concern among online consumers.Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 62-73.

Slyke, C.V., Shim, J.T., Johnson, R., & Jiang, J.J. (2006). Concern for information privacy and onlineconsumer purchasing. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(6), 415-444.

Smith, H.J., Milberg, J.S., & Burke, J.S. (1996). Information privacy: Measuring individuals’ concernsabout organizational practices. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 167-196.

Smith, H. J., Dinev, T., & Xu, H. (2011). Information privacy research: An interdisciplinary review. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 989-1015.

Solove, D.J. (2006). A taxonomy of privacy. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154(3), 477-560.

Solove, D.J. (2007). ‘I’ve got nothing to hide’ and other misunderstandings of privacy. San Diego LawReview(44), 745-772.

Solove, D.J. (2008). Understanding Privacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Son, J.-Y., & Kim, S.S. (2008). Internet users’ information privacy-protective responses: A taxonomyand a nomological model. MIS Quarterly, 32(3), 503-529.

Squicciarini, C.A., Xu, H., & Zhang, X. (2011). CoPE: Enabling collaborative privacy management inonline social networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science andTechnology, 62(3), 521-534.

Stanton, J.M., & Stam, K. (2003). Information technology, privacy, and power within organizations: A viewfrom boundary theory and social exchange perspectives. Surveillance and Society, 1(2), 152-190.

Stewart, K.A., & Segars, A.H. (2002). An empirical examination of the concern for information privacyinstrument. Information Systems Research, 13(1), 36-49.

Stone, B., & Stelter, B. (2009, February 19). Facebook backtracks on use terms. The New YorkTimes, B1, B6.

Stone, E.F., & Stone, D.L. (1990). Privacy in organizations: Theoretical issues, research findings, andprotection mechanisms. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 8(3),349-411.

Straub, D., Boudreau, M.-C., & Gefen, D. (2004). Validation guidelines for IS positivist research.Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13(1), 380-427.

Swire, P.P. (1997). Markets, self-regulation, and government enforcement in the protection ofpersonal information. In Privacy and Self-Regulation in the Information Age (pp. 3-19).Washington, D.C.: Department of Commerce, U.S.A..

Tang, Z., Hu, Y.J., & Smith, M.D. (2008). Gaining trust through online privacy protection: Self-regulation, mandatory standards, or caveat emptor. Journal of Management InformationSystems, 24(4), 153-173.

Thurm, S., & Kane, Y.I. (2010). Your apps are watching you: A WSJ investigation finds that iPhoneand android apps are breaching the privacy of smartphone users.The Wall Street Journal.

Vascellaro, E.J. (2010). Websites rein in tracking tools. The Wall Street Journal.

Waldo, J., Lin, H., & Millett, L.I. (2007). Engaging privacy and information technology in a digital age.Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

Walsh, M. (2010). MMA taking on mobile privacy. MediaPost. Retrieved from http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=141646&nid=121943.

Warren, S.D., & Brandeis, L.D. (1890). The right to privacy. Harvard Law Review, 4(5), 193-220.

Weiss, S. (2007). The need for a paradigm shift in addressing privacy risks in social networkingapplications. In The Future of Identity in the Information Society(Vol. 262/2008, pp.161–171).IFIP WG 9.2, Karlstad, Sweden.

Westin, A.F. (1967). Privacy and freedom. New York, NY: Atheneum.

Xu, H. (2007). The effects of self-construal and perceived control on privacy concerns. Proceedings of the28th Annual International Conference on Information Systems, Montréal, Canada, Paper 125.

Xu, H., and Teo, H.H. (2004). Alleviating consumer’s privacy concern in location-based services: A psychological control perspective, Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conferenceon Information Systems, Washington, D. C., United States, 793-806.

Xu, H., Teo, H.-H., Tan, B.C.Y., & Agarwal, R. (2010). The role of push-pull technology in privacycalculus: The case of location-based services. Journal of Management Information Systems,26(3), 135-174.

Yao, M.Z., Rice, R.E., & Wallis, K. (2007). Predicting user concerns about online privacy. Journal ofthe American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(5), 710-722.

Zwick, D., & Dholakia, N. (1999). Models of privacy in the digital age: Implications for marketing andE-commerce. Research Institute for Telecommunications and Information Marketing (RITIM), University of Rhode Island.

Idée / dominante :

Le paradoxe entre personnalisation du web et confidentialité des informations est latent. En se focalisant sur les applications mobiles, les chercheurs ont démontré qu’une application proposant des offres personnalisées mais respectant la confidentialité des informations de l’utilisateur (par le moyen d’un stockage local, sans serveur central) est plus rassurante et plus utilisée.

Résumé :

Les chercheurs souhaitent évaluer l’appréciation de la personnalisation des applications mobiles par les utilisateurs de smartphones selon deux paramètres : le « process » (la façon dont les informations sont recueillies et traitées) et la satisfaction procurée par la personnalisation (qualité/singularité des offres…). Il s’agit en fait de la confrontation de deux théories, finalement complémentaires. L’ensemble de l’étude est basée sur la réception de coupons de réductions par le moyen d’une application mobile.

Idée / dominante :

Les auteurs dressent un état des lieux conclusions qui ont été faites, à dates, concernant les inquiétudes de la population quant aux problèmes de confidentialité des informations détenues par les entreprises. Afin de faciliter les études ultérieures traitant ce sujet, les auteurs s’attachent à la mise au point d’un instrument de mesure de ces inquiétudes.

Résumé :

Les auteurs on discerné, grâce à la littérature existante, 4 grand thèmes autour desquels tournent les inquiétudes de la population quand aux politiques de protection des données personnelles détenues par les entreprises : la collecte, l’utilisation secondaire non-autorisée (interne ou externe), la légitimité de l’accès à ces données (qui peut y accéder ?) et les erreurs liées à la manipulation de ces données (la réticence à l’effacement des données anciennes les amène à rester « inertes », dans un monde en mouvement). En plus de ces 4 thèmes, deux autres dimensions « tangentielles » sont mises en avant, bien qu’elles semblent représenter un plus infime partie des inquiétudes de la population. Il s’agit de la réduction du jugement (liée à l’augmentation de l’automatisation, aussi bien dans la collecte que dans le traitement => l’être humain n’a plus voix au chapitre), et de la combinaison des bases de données en une database gigantesque, engendrant un effet « mosaïque » (cela va de paire avec la collecte parallèle et non-autorisée, pour un usage secondaire).

Les chercheurs ont ainsi mis au point une série de 15 affirmations à propos desquelles la personne interrogée doit préciser si elle est d’accord ou non. Parmi ces 15 affirmations, 4 permettent de mesurer l’inquiétude de la personne en ce qui concerne la collecte des données, 4 pour les erreurs de manipulation, 4 pour l’utilisation secondaire non-autorisée, et 3 permettent de mesurer le niveau d’inquiétude pour ce qui est de la légitimité d’accès aux données.

Des moyennes du niveau d’inquiétude peuvent ainsi être calculées par thème, ainsi qu’une moyenne globale.
Cet instrument de mesure a été mis au point par les chercheurs au moyen d’une méthode en trois étapes :

• l’exploitation des travaux qui ont déjà été faits à ce sujet, et phase exploratoire via l’interview de 2318 individus entre 1989 et 1993.
• Définition des 4 thèmes principaux via une phase exploratoire supplémentaire.
• Validation des résultats de l’instrument (validité, convergence, généralisabilité), en prenant en compte différents paramètres comme la subjectivité de l’inquiétude. Ainsi, les auteurs se sont basés sur l’hypothèse selon laquelle l’inquiétude soit engendrée par une expérience personnelle préalable (Culnan, 1993 ; Stone et Stone, 1990), et par la couverture de certains scandales par les médias (Westin, 1990). L’inquiétude des individus serait également à associer à des facteurs individuels de personnalité : confiance ou non, paranoïa (Fenigstein et Vanable, 1992), et degréd’acceptation des pratiques de la société (Jessor et Jessor, 1977).
  Le but de la création de cet instrument est avant tout d’aider les personnes se penchant sur ces questions d’inquiétude face à la protection des données. Il s’agit aussi de donner aux managers la possibilité d’être proactif dans leurs politiques de confidentialité.

Notes d’intérêt pour la recherche en cours :

Etat de l’art de la problématique : les inquiétudes identifiées sont classées dans différentes dimensions. Dévoilement d’un outil de mesure, qui peut être utilisé dans la phase confirmatoire (quantitative).

Ce qui n’a pas été abordé :
Le papier date de 1996, et ne tient donc pas compte du rôle des réseaux sociaux dans ces inquiétudes. Il convient d’élargir cette recherche, en ajoutant éventuellement des items dans l’instrument de mesure. Il semblerait que le classement de ces items en 4 catégories soit à conserver. 

Références :

ACM (Association for Computing Machinery). (1980).Code of Ethics, Communications of the ACM 23(7), 425.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1980). Causai Modeling in Marketing, John Wiiey and Sons, New York.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). An Examination of the Validity of Two Models of Attitude, Multivariate Behavioral Research, 323- 359.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1983). A Holistic Methodology for Modeling Consumer Response to Innovation, Operations Research, 128-176.

Bagozzi, R.P. (1993). Assessing Construct Validity in Personality Research: Applications to Measures of Self-Esteem, Journal of Research in Personality, 27(1), 49-87.

Bagozzi, R. P. and Phillips, L. W. (1982). Representing and Testing Organizational Theories: A iHolistic Construal, Administrative Science Quarteriy 27(3), 459-489.

Bagozzi, R. P. and Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaiuation of Structural Equation Models, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (16), 1988.

Bagozzi, R. P. and Yi, Y. (1991). Multitrait-Multi-method Matrices in Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research 17(4), 426-439.

Barki, H. and Hartwick, J. (1994). Measuring User Participation, User Involvement, and User Attitude, MIS Quarteriy 8(1), 59-82.

Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G. andMobley, M. F. (1993). Handbook of Marketing Scales, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA, 3-8.

Bennett, C. J. (1992). Regulating Privacy: Data Protection and Public Policy in Europe and the United States, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.

Bentier, P. M. (1990). Comparative Fit Indexes inStructural Models, Psychological Bulletin107(2), 238-246.

Bentier, P. M. and Bonett, D. (1980). SignificanceTests and Goodness of Fit in the Analysis of Covariance Structures, Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588- 606.

Berscheid, E. (1977). Privacy: A Hidden Variable in Experimental Social Psychology, Journal of Social issues, 33(3),85-101.

Bonoma, T. V. (1985). Case Research in Marketing: Opportunities, Problems, and a Process, Joumal of Marketing Research, 22, 199-208.

Cambridge Reports. (1989). Technology and Consumers: Jobs, Education, Privacy, Bulletin on Consumer Opinion no. 157, Cambridge, MA.

Campbell, D. T. and Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multi- trait-Multimethod Matrix, Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105.

Cespedes, F. V. and Smith, H. J. (1993). Database Marketing: New Rules for Policy and Practice, Sloan Management Review, 34, 7-22.

Churchill, G. (1979). A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs, Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 64-73.

 

Cook, T.D. and Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and Analysis issues for Pield Settings, Rand McNally, Chicago.

Cote, J. A. and Buckley, M. R. (1987). Measurement Error and Theory Testing in Consumer Research: An Illustration of the Importance of Construct Validation, Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 579-582.

Cozby, P.C. (1973). Self-disclosure: A LiteratureReview, Psychological Bulletin 79(2),73-91.

Cronbach, L. (1971). Test Validation, in EducationaiMeasurement (2nd edition), R. L. Thomdike (ed.), American Council on Education, Washington, D.C, 443-507.

Cronbach, L J. and Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct Validity in Psychological Tests, Psychoogical Bulletin 52(4), 281-302.

Culnan, M. J. (1993). ‘How Did They Get My Name?’: An Exploratory Investigation of Consumer Attitudes Toward Secondary Information Use, MIS Quarterly 17(3), 341-363.

Cyert, R. M. and March, J. G. (1963). A BehavioralTheory of the Pirm, Prentice Hall, NewYork.

Date, C J . (1986). An introduction to Database Systems (4th ed.), Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA.

Equifax Inc. (1993). The Equifax Report on Consumers in the information Age, 1990. Aiso Harris-Equifax Consumer Privacy Survey 1991, Harris-Equifax Consumer Privacy Survey 1992, and Harris-Equifax Heaith information Privacy Survey. Equifax Inc., Atlanta, GA.

Fenigstein, A. and Vanable, P. A. (1992). Paranoia and Self-Consciousness, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 62(1), 129-138.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error, Joumal of Marketing Research 18, 39-50.

Gordon, M.E., Slade, L.A., and Schmitt, N. (1986). The ‘Science of the Sophomore’ Revisited: From Conjecture to Empiricism, Academy of Management Review 11(1), 1986, 191-207.

HEW (U.S. Department of Health, Education,and Welfare). (1973). Records, Computers, and the Rights of Citizens: Report of the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Automated Personal Data Systems, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Jarvenpaa, S. L., Dickson, G. W., and DeSanctis, G. (1985). Methodological Issues in Experimental IS Research: Experiences and Recommendations, MIS Quarterly 9(2), 141-156.

Jessor, R. and Jessor, S. (1991). Problem Behavior and Psychosocial Development, Academic Press, New York, 1977, pp. 234-235, as reproduced in Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes, J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, and L. S. Wrightsman (eds.). Academic Press, San Diego, 355-358.

Joreskog, K. and Sorbom, D. (19984). LISREL VI: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by the Maximum Likelihood and Least Squares Methods, Scientific Software, Mooresville, IN.

Katz, J. E. and Tassone, A. R. (1990). Public Opinion Trends: Privacy and Information Technology, Public Opinion Quarterly, 54, 125-143.

Kelvin, P. (1973). A Socio-psychological Examination of Privacy,” British Journal of Social Clinical Psychology, 2(3), 248-261.

Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Foundations of Behavioral Research (3rd ed.). Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York, 477-483.

Kling, R. (1978). Value Conflicts and Social Choices in Electronic Funds Transfer Systems Developments, Communications of the ACM (21:8), 642-657.

Ladd, J. (1989). Computer and Moral Responsibility: A Framework for Ethical Analysis, in The Information Web: Ethical and Social Implications of Computer Networking, C. Gould (ed.), Westview Press, Boulder, CO.

Laudon, K.C. (1986). Dossier Society: Value Choices in the Design of National Information Systems, Columbia University Press, New York.

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), 22-41.

Lee, A. S. Integrating Positivist and Interpretive Approaches to Organizational Research, Organizational Science 2(4), 342-365.

Levin, H.A. and Askin, F. (1977). Privacy in the Courts: Law and Social Reality, Journal of Social Issues, 33(3),138-153.

Linowes, D. F. (1989). Privacy in America: Is Your Private Life in the Public Eye? University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.

Mason, R. O. (1986). Four Ethical Issues of the Information Age, MIS Quarterly 10(1), 4-12.

McDonald, R. P. and Marsh, H. W. (1990). Choosing a Multivariate Model: Noncentrality and Goodness of Fit, Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 247-255.

Milberg, S. J., Burke, S. J., Smith, H. J., and Kallman, E. A. (1995). Values, Personal Information Privacy Concerns, and Regulatory Approaches, Communications of the ACM 38(12), 65-74.

Miller, A. (1982). Computers and Privacy, in Ethics and the Management of Computer Technology, W. M. Hoffman, and J. M. Moore (eds.), Oelgeschlager, Gunn, and Hain Publishers, Inc., Cambridge.

Mowshowitz, A. (1976). The Conquest of Will, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

Orlikowski, W. J. and Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions, Information Systems Research 2(1), 1-28.

PPSC (Privacy Protection Study Commission). (1977).Personal Privacy in an Information Society: Report of the Privacy Protection Study Commission, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Smith, H. J. (1994). Managing Privacy: Information Technology and Organizational America, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.

Smith, H. J., Milberg, S. J., and Kallman, E. A. (1995). Privacy Practices Around the World: An Empirical Study, working paper, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.

Stone, D. L. (1986). Relationship Between Introversion/Extraversion, Values Regarding Con- trol Over Information, and Perceptions of Invasion of Privacy, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 62(2), 371-376.

Stone, E. F. and Stone, D. L. (1990). Privacy in Organizations: Theoretical Issues, Research Findings, and Protection Mechanisms,” in Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management (8), K. M. Rowland and G. R. Ferris (eds.), JAIPress, Greenwich, CT, 349-411.

Stone, E. F., Gardner, D. G., Gueutal, H. G., and McClure, S. (1983). A Field Experiment Comparing Information-Privacy Values, Beliefs, and Attitudes Across Several Types of Organizations,” Journal of Applied Psychoiogy (68:3), 459-468.

Straub, D. W. (1989). Validating instruments in MISResearch, MIS Quarterly, 3(2), 146-169.

Straub, D. W., Jr. and Collins, R. W. (1990). KeyInformation Liability Issues Facing Managers: Software Piracy, Proprietary Databases, and Individual Rights to Privacy, MIS Quarterly 14(2), 142-156.

Straub, D.W., Limayem, M., and Karahanna, E. (1995). Measuring System Usage: Implications for IS Theory Testing, Management Science 41(8), 1328- 1342.

Tolchinsky, P.D., McCuddy, M.K., Adams, J., Ganster, D.C, Woodman, R.W., and Fromkin, H.L. (1981). Employee Perceptions of Invasion of Privacy: A Field Simulation Experiment, Joumal of Applied Psychology 66(3), 308-313.

Warren, C. and Laslett, B. (1977). Privacy and Secrecy: A Conceptual Comparison, Journal of Social issues 33(3), 43-51.

Westin, A. F. (1967). Privacy and Preedom, Atheneum Publishers, New York.

Westin, A.F. (1990). Consumer Privacy Issues in the Nineties, in The Equifax Report on Consumers in the information Age, Equifax Inc., Atlanta, GA, 18-28.

Westin, A. F. and Baker, M. A. (1972). Databanks in a Pree Society, Ouadrangle Books, New York.

Yin, R. K. (1988). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.

Référence :
Smith, H.J., Dinev, T., & Xu, H. (2011). Information Privacy Research: An Interdisciplinary Review. MIS Quarterly, 35 (4), 989-1015

Notes d’intérêt pour la recherche en cours :

Synthèse exhaustive des 320 articles et des 128 ouvrages écrits sur la «privacy», tableaux de classification des œuvres par thèmes en annexe, présentation du modèle APCO et de ses failles, mapping des tactiques de gestion de l’identité.

Ce qui n’a pas été abordé :

Pas de place pour les caractéristiques d’un site internet, dont l’appréciation est soumise à jugement subjectif, dans les antécédents jouant un rôle sur le niveau d’inquiétude des individus. Le croisement de cet article avec les recherches qui ont été faites ensuite permettrait de creuser ce point, notamment pour ce qui est des réseaux sociaux. 

Références :

 

Ackerman, M. (2004). Privacy in Pervasive Environments: Next Generation Labeling Protocols, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8 (6), 430-439.

Acquisti, A. (2004). Privacy in Electronic Commerce and the Economics of Immediate Gratification, in Proceedings of the 5th ACM Electronic Commerce Conference, New York: ACM Press, 21-29.

Acquisti, A., and Gross, R. (2006). Imagined Communities: Awareness, Information Sharing, and Privacy on the Facebook, in Proceedings of 6th Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium, Cambridge, UK, June 28-30, 36-58.

Acquisti, A., and Grossklags, J. (2005a). Privacy and Rationality in Individual Decision Making, IEEE Security & Privacy 3 (1), 26-33.

Acquisti, A., and Grossklags, J. (2005b). Uncertainty, Ambiguity and Privacy,” in Proceedings of the 4th Annual Workshop Economics and Information Security, Cambridge, MA, June 2-3, 2-3.

Acquisti, A., and Varian, H. R. (2005). Conditioning Prices on Purchase History, Marketing Science 24(3), 367-381.

Alderman, E., and Kennedy, C. (1997). The Right to Privacy, New York: Vintage Books.

Allen, M. W., Coopman, S. J., Hart, J. L., and Walker, K. L. (2007). Workplace Surveillance and Managing Privacy Boundaries, Management Communication Quarterly 21(2), 172-200.

Altman, I. (1975). The Environment and Social Behavior: Privacy, Personal Space, Territory, and Crowding, Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.

Altman, I. (1977). Privacy Regulation: Culturally Universal or Cul- turally Specific?, Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 66-84.

Andrade, E. B., Kaltcheva, V., and Weitz, B. (2002). Self-Disclosure on the Web: The Impact of Privacy Policy, Reward, and Brand Reputation, in Advances in Consumer Research, S. M. Broniarczyk and K. Nakamoto (eds.), Valdosta, GA: Association for Consumer Research, 350-353.

Ariss, S. S. (2002). Computer Monitoring: Benefits and Pitfalls Facing Management, Information & Management 39(7), 553-558.

Ashworth, L., and Free, C. (2006). Marketing Dataveillance and Digital Privacy: Using Theories of Justice to Understand Con- sumers Online Privacy Concerns, Journal of Business Ethics 67(2), 107-123.

Awad, N. F., and Krishnan, M. S. (2006). The Personalization Privacy Paradox: An Empirical Evaluation of Information Trans- parency and the Willingness to be Profiled Online for Personalization, MIS Quarterly 30(1), 13-28.

Bansal, G., Zahedi, F., and Gefen, D. (2008). The Moderating Influence of Privacy Concern on the Efficacy of Privacy Assurance Mechanisms for Building Trust: A Multiple-Context Investigation, in Proceedings of 29th International Conference on Information Systems. Paris, France, December 14-17.

Bansal, G., Zahedi, F. M., and Gefen, D. (2010). The Impact of Personal Dispositions on Information Sensitivity, Privacy Concern and Trust in Disclosing Health Information Online, Decision Support Systems 49(2), 138-150.

Belanger, F., Hiller, J. S., and Smith, W. J. (2002). Trustworthiness in Electronic Commerce: The Role of Privacy, Security, and Site Attributes, Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11(3-4), 245-270.

Bellman, S., Johnson, E. J., Kobrin, S. J., and Lohse, G. L. (2004). International Differences in Information Privacy Concerns: A Global Survey of Consumers, Information Society 20(5), 313-324.

Bennett, C. J. (1992). Regulating Privacy: Data Protection and Public Policy in Europe and the United States, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Bennett, C. J. (1995). The Political Economy of Privacy: A Review of the Literature, Hackensack, NJ: Center for Social and Legal Research.

Bennett, C. J., and Raab, C. D. (1997). The Adequacy of Privacy: The European Union Data Protection Directive and the North American Response,” Information Society 13(3), 245-263.

Benson, D. (1983). A Field Study of End User Computing: Findings and Issues, MIS Quarterly 7(4), 35-45.

Blattberg, R. C., and Deighton, J. (1991). Interactive Marketing: Exploiting the Age of Addressability, Sloan Management Review 33(1), 5-14.

Bok, S. (1989). Secrets: On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation, New York: Vintage.

Bowie, N. E., and Jamal, K. (2006). Privacy Rights on the Internet: Self-Regulation or Government Regulation?, Business Ethics Quarterly 16(3), 323-342.

Boyd, D. (2008). Facebook’s Privacy Trainwreck: Exposure, Invasion and Social Convergence, Convergence: The Inter- national Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 14(1), 13-20.

Boyd, D., and Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13(1), Article 11.

Breckenridge, A. C. (1970). The Right to Privacy, Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

Brenton, M. (1964). The Privacy Invaders, New York: Coward McCann.

Bruner II, G. C., and Kumar, A. (2007). Attitude toward Location- Based Advertising, Journal of Interactive Advertising 7(2)

Budnitz, M. E. (1998). Privacy Protection for Consumer Trans- actions in Electronic Commerce: Why Self-Regulation Is Inadequate, South Carolina Law Review (49).

Bynum, T. (2008). Computer and Information Ethics, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2008 Edition), E. N. Zalta (ed.),Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.

Camp, L. J. (1999). Web Security and Privacy: An American Perspective, Information Society 15(4), 249-256.

Campbell, A. J. (1997). Relationship Marketing in Consumer Markets, Journal of Direct Marketing 11(3), 44-57.

Campbell, J. E., and Carlson, M. (2002). Panopticon.com: Online Surveillance and the Commodification of Privacy, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 46(4), 586-606.

Caudill, E. M., and Murphy, P. E. (2000). Consumer Online Privacy: Legal and Ethical Issues, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 19(1), 7-19.

Cespedes, F. V., and Smith, H. J. (1993). Database Marketing: New Rules for Policy and Practice, Sloan Management Review 34(4), 7-22.

Chellappa, R. K. (2008). Consumers’ Trust in Electronic Commerce Transactions: The Role of Perceived Privacy and Perceived Security, unpublished paper, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.

Chellappa, R. K., and Sin, R. (2005). Personalization Versus Privacy: An Empirical Examination of the Online Consumer’s Dilemma, Information Technology and Management 6(2), 181-202.

Chen, K., and Rea, A. I. (2004). Protecting Personal Information Online: A Survey of User Privacy Concerns and Control Techniques, Journal of Computer Information Systems 44(4), 85-92.

Clark, T. D., Jones, M. C., and Armstrong, C. P. (2007). The Dynamic Structure of Management Support Systems: Theory Development, Research Focus, and Direction, MIS Quarterly 31(3), 579-615.

Clarke, R. (2001). Person Location and Person Tracking: Tech- nologies, Risks and Policy Implications, Information Technology & People 14(2), 206-231.

Cohen, J. E. (2001). Privacy, Ideology, and Technology: A Response to Jeffrey Rosen, Georgetown Law Journal (89), 2029.

Cranor, L. F. (2003). I Didn’t Buy it for Myself’: Privacy and Ecommerce Personalization, in Proceedings of the 2003 ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, Washington, DC, October 27-30, 111-117

Cranor, L. F., Egelman, S., Tsai, J., and Acquisti, A. (2007). The Effect of Online Privacy Information on Purchasing Behavior: An Experimental Study, in Proceedings of 28th International Conference on Information Systems, Montréal, Canada, December 9-12.

Culnan, M. J. (1985). Consumer Awareness of Name Removal Procedures: Implication for Direct Marketing, Journal of Interactive Marketing (9), 10-19.

Culnan, M. J. (1993). ‘How Did They Get My Name’? An Exploratory Investigation of Consumer Attitudes toward Secon- dary Information Use, MIS Quarterly 17(3), 341-364.

Culnan, M. J. 2000. Protecting Privacy Online: Is Self-Regulation Working?, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 19(1), 20-26.

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.

Culnan, M. J., and Bies, R. J. (2003). Consumer Privacy: Balancing Economic and Justice Considerations, Journal of Social Issues 59(2), 323-342.

Culnan, M. J., and Williams, C. C. (2009). How Ethics Can Enhance Organizational Privacy: Lessons from the ChoicePoint and TJX Data Breaches, MIS Quarterly 33(4), 673-687.

D’Urso, S. (2006). Who’s Watching Us at Work? Toward a Structural–Perceptual Model of Electronic Monitoring and Surveillance in Organizations, Communication Theory 16(3), 281-303.

Davies, S. G. (1997). Re-Engineering the Right to Privacy: How Privacy Has Been Transformed from a Right to a Commodity, in Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape, P. E. Agre and M. Rotenberg (eds.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 143-165.

Dhillon, G. S., and Moores, T. (2001). Internet Privacy: Interpreting Key Issues, Information Resources Management Journal 14(4), 33-37.

Dholakia, N., and Zwick, D. (2001). Contrasting European and American Approaches to Privacy in Electronic Markets: A Philosophical Perspective, Electronic Markets 11(2), 116-120.

Dinev, T., Bellotto, M., Hart, P., Russo, V., Serra, I., and Colautti, C. (2006a). Internet Users’ Privacy Concerns and Beliefs About Government Surveillance: An Exploratory Study of Differences between Italy and the United States, Journal of Global Information Management 14(4), 57-93.

Dinev, T., Bellotto, M., Hart, P., Russo, V., Serra, I., and Colautti, C. (2006b). Privacy Calculus Model in E-Commerce: A Study of Italy and the United States, European Journal of Information Systems 15(4), 389-402.

Dinev, T., and Hart, P. (2004). Internet Privacy Concerns and Their Antecedents: Measurement Validity and a Regression Model, Behavior and Information Technology 23(6), 413-423.

Dinev, T., and Hart, P. (2006). An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions, Information Systems Research 17(1), 61-80.

Dinev, T., and Hart, P. (2007). Privacy Concerns and Levels of Information Exchange: An Empirical Investigation of Intended E-Services Use, E-Service Journal 4(3), 25-61.

Dinev, T., Xu, H., and Smith, H. J. (2009). Information Privacy Values, Beliefs and Attitudes: An Empirical Analysis of Web 2.0 Privacy, in Proceedings of 42nd Hawaii International Con- ference on System Sciences, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

Dolnicar, S., and Jordaan, Y. (2007). A Market-Oriented Approach to Responsibly Managing Information Privacy Concerns in Direct Marketing, Journal of Advertising 36(2), 123-149.

Dwyer, C. 2007. Digital Relationships in the ‘MySpace’ Generation: Results from a Qualitative Study, in Proceedings of 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.

Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S., and Passerini, K. (2007). Trust and Privacy Concern Within Social Networking Sites: A Comparison of Facebook and MySpace, in Proceedings of the 13th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Keystone, CO, August 9-12.

Eastlick, M. A., Lotz, S. L., and Warrington, P. (2006). Understanding Online B-to-C Relationships: An Integrated Model of Privacy Concerns, Trust, and Commitment, Journal of Business Research 59(8), 877-886.

Edelman, B. (2011). Adverse Selection in Online ‘Trust’ Certifications and Search Results, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications (1), 17-25.

Etzioni, A. (1999). The Limits of Privacy, New York: Basic Books.

Fairweather, N. B. (1999). Surveillance in Employment: The Case of Teleworking, Journal of Business Ethics 22(1), 39-49.

Featherman, M. S., and Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Predicting E-Services Adoption: A Perceived Risk Facets Perspective, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59(4), 451-474.

Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Foxman, E. R., and Kilcoyne, P. (1993). Information Technology Marketing Practice, and Consumer Privacy: Ethical Issues, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 12(1), 106-119.

Garfinkel, S. (2000). Database Nation: The Death of Privacy in the 21st Century, Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.

Gomez, J., Pinnick, T., and Soltani, A. (2009). KnowPrivacy: The Current State of Web Privacy, Data Collection, and Information Sharing, School of Information, University of California Berkeley

Goodhue, D. L., and Straub, D. W. (1991). Security Concerns of System Users: A Study of Perceptions of the adequacy of Security, Information and Management 20(1), 13-27.

Grinter, R., and Palen, L. (2002). Instant Messaging in Teen Life, in Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, New Orleans, Louisiana, 21-30.

Gross, R., and Acquisti, A. (2005). Information Revelation and Privacy in Online Social Networks, in Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, Alexandria, VA.

Häkkilä, J., and Chatfield, C. (2005). ‘It’s like If You OpenedSomeone Else’s Letter’: User Perceived Privacy and Social Practices with SMS Communication, in Proceedings of the Mobile HCI Conference, Salzburg, Austria, 219-222.

Hann, I.-H., Hui, K.-L., Lee, S. Y. T., and Png, I. P. L. (2008). Overcoming Online Information Privacy Concerns: An Information-Processing Theory Approach, Journal of Management Information Systems 24(2), 13-42.

Henderson, H. (1999). Privacy in the Information Age, New York: Facts On File.

Herson, L. J. R. (1990). Politics of Ideas: Political Theory and American Public Policy, Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

Hirshleifer, J. (1980). Privacy: Its Origin, Function, and Future, The Journal of Legal Studies 9(4), 649-664.

Hoadley, C. M., Xu, H., Lee, J. J., and Rosson, M. B. (2010). Privacy as Information Access and Illusory Control: The Case of the Facebook News Feed Privacy Outcry, Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 9(1), 50-60.

Hodge, M. J. (2006). Fourth Amendment and Privacy Issues on the New Internet: Facebook.com and Myspace.com, Southern Illinois University Law Journal (31), 95-123.

Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., and Peralta, M. A. (1999). Information Privacy in the Marketspace: Implications for the Commercial Uses of Anonymity on the Web, Information Society 15(2), 129-139.

Hui, K.-L., Tan, B. C. Y., and Goh, C.-Y. (2006). Online Information Disclosure: Motivators and Measurements, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (6), 415-441.

Hui, K. L., Teo, H. H., and Lee, S. Y. T. (2007). The Value of Privacy Assurance: An Exploratory Field Experiment, MIS Quarterly 31(1), 19-33.

Ito, M., and Daisuke, O. (2003). Mobile Phones, Japanese Youth and the Replacement of Social Contact, in Proceedings of Front Stage/Back Stage: Mobile Communication and the Renegotiation of the Social Sphere, R. Ling and P. Pedersen (eds.), Grimstad, Norway.

Jagatic, T. N., Johnson, N. A., Jakobsson, M., and Menczer, F. (2007). Social Phishing, Communications of the ACM 50(10), 94-100.

Jarvenpaa, S. L., and Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams, Organization Science 10(6), 791-815.

Jarvenpaa, S. L., and Tiller, E. H. (1999). Integrating Market, Technology, and Policy Opportunities in E-Business Strategy, Journal of Strategic Information Systems 8(3), 235-249.

Jarvenpaa, S. L., Tractinsky, N., and Vitale, M. (2000). Consumer Trust in an Internet Store, Information Technology and Management 1(12), 45-71.

Jensen, C., Potts, C., and Jensen, C. (2005). Privacy Practices of Internet Users: Self-Reports versus Observed Behavior, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (63), 203–227.

Jentzsch, N. (2001). The Economics and Regulation of Financial Privacy: A Comparative Analysis of the United States and Europe, Working Paper, John F. Kennedy Institute.

Johnson, C. A. (1974). Privacy as Personal Control, in Man- Environment Interactions: Evaluations and Applications: Part 2, D. H. Carson (ed.), Washington, DC: Environmental Design Research Association, 83-100.

Junglas, A. I., and Spitzmüller, C. (2005). A Research Model for Studying Privacy Concerns Pertaining to Location-Based Services, in Proceedings of the 38th Hawaii International Con- ference on System Sciences, Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computing Society Press.

Kelvin, P. (1973). A Social Psychological Examination of Privacy, British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology (12), 248-261.

Kim, M.-C. (2004). Surveillance Technology, Privacy and Social Control: With Reference to the Case of the Electronic National Identification Card in South Korea, International Sociology 19(2), 193-213.

Kimmel, A. J. (1996). Ethical Issues in Behavioral Research, Boston: Blackwell Publishers.

Klopfer, P. H., and Rubenstein, D. I. (1977). The Concept Privacy and Its Biological Basis, Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 52-65.

Kobsa, A. (2002). Personalized Hypermedia and International Privacy, Communications of the ACM 45(5), 64-67.

Kobsa, A. (2007). Privacy-Enhanced Personalization, Communications of the ACM 50(8), 24-33.

Kobsa, A., and Schreck, J. (2003). Privacy through Pseudonymity in User-Adaptive Systems, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (3), 149–183.

LaRose, R., and Rifon, N. (2006). Your Privacy Is Assured—of Being Disturbed: Comparing Web Sites with and Without Privacy Seals, New Media and Society 8(6), 1009-1029.

Laudon, K. C. (1996). Markets and Privacy, Communications of the ACM 39(9), 92-104.

Laufer, R. S., and Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a Concept and a Social Issue: Multidimensional Developmental Theory, Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 22-42.

Lederer, S., Hong, J. I., Dey, A. K., and Landay, J. A. (2004). Personal Privacy through Understanding and Action: Five Pitfalls for Designers, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8(6), 440-454.

Lederer, S., Mankoff, J., and Dey, K. A. (2003). Who Wants to Know What When? Privacy Preference Determinants in Ubiquitous Computing, in Proceedings of Conferences on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Leidner, D., and Kayworth, T. (2006). Review: A Review of Culture in Information Systems Research: Toward a Theory of Information Technology Culture Conflict, MIS Quarterly 30(2), 357-399.

Ling, R. (2004). The Coordination of Everyday Life, in The Mobile Connection: The Cell Phone’s Impact on Society, R. Ling (ed.), Amsterdam: Elsevier, 57-81.

Lu, Y., Tan, B. C. Y., and Hui, K.-L. (2004). Inducing Customers to Disclose Personal Information to Internet Businesses with Social Adjustment Benefits, in Proceedings of 25th International Conference on Information Systems, R. Agarwal, L. J. Kirsch, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Washington, DC, December 9-12, 272-281.

Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., and Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet Users’ Information Privacy Concerns (IUIPC): The Construct, the Scale, and a Causal Model, Information Systems Research 15(4), 336-355.

Margulis, S. T. (1977a). Conceptions of Privacy: Current Status and Next Steps, Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 5-21.

Margulis, S. T. (1977b). Privacy as a Behavioral Phenomenon: Introduction, Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 1-4.

Margulis, S. T. (2003a). On the Status and Contribution of Westin’s and Altman’s Theories of Privacy, Journal of Social Issues 59(2), 411-429.

Margulis, S. T. (2003b). Privacy as a Social Issue and Behavioral Concept, Journal of Social Issues 59(2), 243-261.

Marx, G. T. (1999). What’s in a Name? Some Reflections on the Sociology of Anonymity, Information Society 15(2), 99-112.

Marx, G. T. (2001). Murky Conceptual Waters: The Public and the Private, Ethics and Information Technology 3(3), 157-169.

McGinity, M. (2000). Surfing Your Turf: For a Medium that Holds Anonymity in High Rregard, Privacy Is Fast Eroding, Communications of the ACM 43(4), 19-21.

McLean, D. (1995). Privacy and Its Invasion, Westport, CT: Praeger.

McRobb, S., and Rogerson, S. (2004). Are They Really Listening? An Investigation into Published Online Privacy Policies at the Beginning of the Third Millennium, Information Technology & People 17(4), 442.

Meeks, B. N. (1997). Privacy Lost, Anytime, Anywhere, Communications of the ACM 40(8), 11-13.

Meeks, B. N. (1999). The Privacy Hoax, Communications of the ACM 42(2), 17-19.

Metzger, M. J. (2004). Privacy, Trust, and Disclosure: Exploring Barriers to Electronic Commerce, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (9:4).

Milberg, S. J., Burke, S. J., Smith, H. J., and Kallman, E. A. (1995). Values, Personal Information Privacy, and Regulatory Approaches, Communications of the ACM 38(12), 65-74.

Milberg, S. J., Smith, H. J., and Burke, S. J. 2000. Information Privacy: Corporate Management and National Regulation, Organization Science 11(1), 35-57.

Milne, G. R. (1997). Consumer Participation in Mailing Lists: A Field Experiment, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 16(2), 298-309.

Milne, G. R., and Boza, M.-E. (1999). Trust and Concern in Consumers’ Perceptions of Marketing Information Management Practices, Journal of Interactive Marketing 13(1), 5-24.

Milne, G. R., and Culnan, M. J. (2002). Using the Content of Online Privacy Notices to Inform Public Policy: A Longitudinal Analysis of the 1998-2001 US Web Surveys, Information Society 18(5), 345-359.

Milne, G. R., and Gordon, E. M. (1993). Direct Mail Privacy- Efficiency Trade-Offs Within an Implied Social Contract Framework, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 12(2), 206-215.

Milne, G. R., and Rohm, A. (2000). Consumer Privacy and Name Removal Across Direct Marketing Channels: Exploring Opt-in and Opt-out Alternatives, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 19(2), 238-249.

Milne, G. R., Rohm, A., and Boza, M.-E. (1999). Trust Has to Be Earned, in Frontiers of Direct Marketing, J. Phelps (ed.), New York: Direct Marketing Educational Foundation, 31-41.

Miyazaki, A., and Krishnamurthy, S. (2002). Internet Seals of Approval: Effects on Online Privacy Policies and Consumer Perceptions, Journal of Consumer Affairs 36(1), 28-49.

Moon, Y. (2000). Intimate Exchanges: Using Computers to Elicit Self-Disclosure from Consumers, Journal of Consumer Research (26), 323-339.

Mowday, R. T., and Sutton, R. I. (1993). Organizational Behavior: Linking Individuals and Groups to Organizational Contexts, Annual Reviews in Psychology 44(1), 195-229.

Nissenbaum, H. (1998). Protecting Privacy in an Information Age: The Problem of Privacy in Public, Law and Philosophy 17(5), 559-596.

Nissenbaum, H. (1999). The Meaning of Anonymity in an Information Age, The Information Society 15(2), 141-144.

Norberg, P. A., and Horne, D. R. (2007). Privacy Attitudes and Privacy-Related Behavior, Psychology and Marketing 24(10), 829-847.

Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., and Horne, D. A. (2007). The Privacy Paradox: Personal Information Disclosure Intentions Versus Behaviors, Journal of Consumer Affairs 41(1), 100-126.

Nowak, G. J., and Phelps, J. (1992). Understanding Privacy Concerns: An Assessment of Consumers’s Information-Related Knowledge and Beliefs, Journal of Direct Marketing 6(4), 28-39.

Nowak, G. J., and Phelps, J. (1995). Direct Marketing and the Use of Individual-Level Consumer Information: Determining How and When ‘Privacy’ Matters, Journal of Direct Marketing 9(3), 46-60.

Nowak, G. J., and Phelps, J. (1997). Direct Marketing and the Use of Individual-Level Consumer Information: Determining How and When “Privacy” Matters, Journal of Direct Marketing 11(4), 94-108.

O’Donoghue, T., and Rabin, M. (2001). Choice and Procrastination, Quarterly Journal of Economics (116), 121-160.

Odlyzko, A. (2004). Privacy, Economics, and Price Discrimination on the Internet, in Economics of Information Security, L. J. Camp and S. Lewis (eds.), New York: Springer, 187-211.

Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer Acceptance of Electronic Commerce: Integrating Trust and Risk with the Technology Acceptance Model, International Journal of Electronic Commerce 7(3), 69-103.

Pavlou, P. A., and Gefen, D. (2004). Building Effective Online Marketplaces with Institution-Based Trust, Information Systems Research 15(1), 37-59.

Pearlson, K. E., and Saunders, C. S. (2009). Managing and Using Information Systems (4th ed.), Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Pedersen, D. M. (1997). Psychological Functions of Privacy, Journal of Environmental Psychology 17(2), 147-156.

Pedersen, D. M. (1999). Model for Types of Privacy by Privacy Functions, Journal of Environmental Psychology 19(4), 397-405.

Peter, J. P., and Tarpey, S. L. X. (1997). A Comparative Analysis of Three Consumer Decision Strategies, Journal of Consumer Research 2(1), 29.

Phelps, J., Nowak, G., and Ferrell, E. (2000). Privacy Concerns and Consumer Willingness to Provide Personal Information, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 19(1), 27-41.

Ponemon Institute. (2007). Database Security 2007: Threats and Priorities Within IT Database Infrastructure, Traverse City, MI.

Posner, R. A. (1981). The Economics of Privacy, American Economic Review 71(2), 405-409.

Posner, R. A. (1984). An Economic Theory of Privacy, in Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy: An Anthology, F. Schoeman (ed.), New York: Cambridge University Press, 333-345.

Preston, J. (2004). Judge Strikes Down Section of Patriot Act Allowing Secret Subpoenas of Internet Data, The New York Times, Technology Section, September 30.

Propp, K. M., and Kreps, G. L. (1994). A Rose by Any Other Name: The Vitality of Group Communication Research, Communication Studies 45(1), 7-19.

Qian, H., and Scott, C. R. (2007). Anonymity and Self-Disclosure on Weblogs, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12(4), 1428-1451.

Rabin, M., and O’Donoghue, T. (2000). The Economics of Imme- diate Gratification, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (13), 233-250.

Regan, P. M. (1995). Legislating Privacy: Technology, Social Values, and Public Policy, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Rensel, A. D., Abbas, J. M., and Rao, H. R. (2006). Private Trans- actions in Public Places: An Exploration of the Impact of the Computer Environment on Public Transactional Web Site Use, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 7(1), 19-50.

Richards, N. M., and Solove, D. J. (2007). Privacy’s Other Path: Recovering the Law of Confidentiality, Georgetown Law Journal 96(1), 123-182.

Rifon, N. J., LaRose, R., and Choi, S. M. (2005). Your Privacy Is Sealed: Effects of Web Privacy Seals on Trust and Personal Disclosures, Journal of Consumer Affairs 39(2), 339-362.

Rindfleisch, T. C. (1997). Privacy, Information Technology, and Health Care, Communications of the ACM 40(8), 92-100.

Rosen, J. (2000). The Unwanted Gaze: The Destruction of Privacy in America, New York: Random House.

Schoeman, F. D. (1984) Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy: An Anthology, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schoenbachler, D. D., and Gordon, G. L. (2002). Trust and Cus- tomer Willingness to Provide Information in Database-Driven Relationship Marketing, Journal of Interactive Marketing 16(3), 2-16.

Schwaig, K. S., Kane, G. C., and Storey, V. C. (2006). Compliance to the Fair Information Practices: How Are the Fortune 500 Handling Online Privacy Disclosures?, Information & Management 43(7), 805-820.

Shah, J. R., White, G. L., and Cook, J. R. (2007). Privacy Protec- tion Overseas as Perceived by USA-Based IT Professionals, Journal of Global Information Management 15(1), 68-81.

Shapiro, S. (1998). Places and Spaces: The Historical Interaction of Technology, Home, and Privacy,” Information Society 14(4), 275-284.

Sheehan, K. B. (1999). An Investigation of Gender Differences in On-Line Privacy Concerns and Resultant Behaviors, Journal of Interactive Marketing 13(4), 24-38.

Sheehan, K. B. (2002). Toward a Typology of Internet Users and Online Privacy Concerns, Information Society 18(1), 21-32.

Sheehan, K. B., and Hoy, M. G. (1999). Using E-Mail To Survey Internet Users in the United States: Methodology and Assessment, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 4(3).

Sheehan, K. B., and Hoy, M. G. (2000). Dimensions of Privacy Concern among Online Consumers, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 19(1), 62-73.

Sheng, H., Nah, F., and Siau, K. (2008). An Experimental Study on U-Commerce Adoption: The Impact of Personalization and Privacy Concerns, Journal of Associations for Information Systems 9(16), Article 15.

Singer, P. (1991). A Companion to Ethics, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley- Blackwell.

Sipior, J. C., and Ward, B. T. (1995). The Ethical and Legal Quandary of Email Privacy, Communications of the ACM 38(12), 48-54.

Sipior, J. C., Ward, B. T., and Rainone, S. M. (1998). Ethical Management of Employee E-Mail Privacy, Information Systems Management 15(1), 41-47.

Smith, H. J. (2001). Information Privacy and Marketing: What the US Should (and Shouldn’t) Learn from Europe, California Management Review 43(2), 8-33.

Smith, H. J. (2004). Information Privacy and its Management, MIS Quarterly Executive 3(4), 201-213.

Smith, H. J., Milberg, J. S., and Burke, J. S. (1996). Information Privacy: Measuring Individuals’ Concerns About Organizational Practices, MIS Quarterly 20(2), 167-196.

Sobel, L. A. (1976). War on Privacy, New York: Facts on File.

Solove, D. J. (2004). The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Information Age, New York: New York University Press.

Solove, D. J. (2006). A Taxonomy of Privacy, University of Pennsylvania Law Review 154(3), 477-560.

Solove, D. J. (2008). Understanding Privacy, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

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.

Stone, E. F., and Stone, D. L. (1990). Privacy in Organizations: Theoretical Issues, Research Findings, and Protection Mechanisms, Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management 8(3), 349-411.

Stone-Romero, E. F., Stone, D. L., and Hyatt, D. (2003). Personnel Selection Procedures and Invasion of Privacy, Journal of Social Issues 59(2), 343-368.

Tabak, F., and Smith, W. P. (2005). Privacy and Electronic Monitoring in the Workplace: A Model of Managerial Cognition and Relational Trust Development, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 17(3), pp. 173-189.

Tang, Z., Hu, Y. J., and Smith, M. D. (2008). Gaining TrustThrough Online Privacy Protection: Self-Regulation, Mandatory Standards, or Caveat Emptor, Journal of Management Information Systems 24(4), 153-173.

Taylor, C. R. (2004a). Consumer Privacy and the Market for Customer Information, RAND Journal of Economics 35(4), 631-650.

Taylor, C. R. (2004b). Privacy and Information Acquisition in Competitive Markets, Working Paper Series, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Berkeley, CA.

Tefft, S. K. (1980). Secrecy: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, New York: Human Sciences Press.

Turow, J. (2003). Americans & Online Privacy: The System Is Broken, report from the Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania.

Unni, R., and Harmon, R. (2007). Perceived Effectiveness of Push vs. Pull Mobile Location-Based Advertising, Journal of Interactive Advertising 7(2).

Van Slyke, C., Shim, J. T., Johnson, R., and Jiang, J. J. (2006). Concern for Information Privacy, Risk Perception and Online Consumer Purchasing, Journal of the Association for Information Systems 7(6), 415-444.

Walczuch, R. M., and Steeghs, L. (2001). Implications of the New EU Directive on Data Protection for Multinational Corporations, Information Technology & People 14(2), 142-162.

Wald, M. (2004). Airline Gave Government Information on Passengers, New York Times, Technology Section, January 18.

Waldo, J., Lin, H., and Millett, L. I. (2007). Engaging Privacy and Information Technology in a Digital Age, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Walsham, G. (1996). Ethical Theory, Codes of Ethics and IS Practice, Information Systems Journal 6(1), 69-81.

Wang, S., Beatty, S. E., and Foxx, W. (2004). Signaling the Trust- worthiness of Small Online Retailers, Journal of Interactive Marketing 18(1), 53-69.

Warren, C., and Laslett, B. (1977). Privacy and Secrecy: Conceptual Comparison, Journal of Social Issues 33(3), 43-51.

Warren, S. D., and Brandeis, D. L. (1890). The Right to Privacy, Harvard Law Review 4(5), 193-220.

Weinstein, W. L. (1971). The Private and the Free: A Conceptual Inquiry, in Privacy: Nomos XIII, J. R. Pennock and J. W. Chapman (eds.), New York: Atherton Press, pp. 624-692.

Weisband, S. P., and Reinig, B. A. (1995). Managing User Percep- tions of Email Privacy, Communications of the ACM (38:12), 40-47.

Werhane, P. H. (1994). The Normative/Descriptive Distinction in Methodologies of Business Ethics, Business Ethics Quarterly 4(2), 175-180.

Westin, A. F. (1967). Privacy and Freedom, New York: Atheneum.

Westin, A. F. (2001). Opinion Surveys: What Consumers Have to Say About Information Privacy, Prepared Witness Testimony, The House Committee on Energy and Commerce, W. J. “Billy” Tauzin, Chairman, May 8.

Westin, A. F. (2003). Social and Political Dimensions of Privacy, Journal of Social Issues 59(2), 431-453.

White, C., and Christy, D. (1987). The Information Center Concept: A Normative Model and a Study of Six Installations, MIS Quarterly 11(4), 450-458.

White, T. B. (2004). Consumer Disclosure and Disclosure Avoidance: A Motivational Framework, Journal of Consumer Psychology 14(1/2), 41-51.

Xu, H. (2007). The Effects of Self-Construal and Perceived Control on Privacy Concerns, in Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Information Systems, Montréal, Canada, December 9-12.

Xu, H., Dinev, T., Smith, H. J., and Hart, P. (2008). Examining the Formation of Individual’s Information Privacy Concerns: Toward an Integrative View, in Proceedings of 29th Inter- national Conference on Information Systems, Paris, France, December 14-17.

Xu, H., and Gupta, S. (2009). The Effects of Privacy Concerns and Personal Innovativeness on Potential and Experienced Customers’ Adoption of Location-Based Services, Electronic Markets—The International Journal on Networked Business 19(2), 137-140.

Xu, H., and Teo, H. H. (2004). Alleviating Consumer’s Privacy Concern in Location-Based Services: A Psychological Control Perspective, in Proceedings of the 25th International Con- ference on Information Systems, R. Agarwal, L. J. Kirsch, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Washington, DC, December 9-12, 793-806.

Xu, H., Teo, H. H., and Tan, B. C. Y. (2005). Predicting the Adoption of Location-Based Services: The Roles of Trust and Privacy Risk, in Proceedings of 26th International Conference on Infor- mation Systems, D. Avison, D. Galletta, and J. I. DeGross (eds.), Las Vegas, NV, December 11-14, 897-910.

Xu, H., Teo, H. H., Tan, B. C. Y., and Agarwal, R. (2010). The Role of Push-Pull Technology in Privacy Calculus: The Case of Location-Based Services, Journal of Management Information Systems 26(3), 137-176.

Younger Committee Report. (1972). Report of the Committee on Privacy, Cmnd.5012 HMSO.

Zweig, D., and Webster, J. (2002). Where Is the Line between Benign and Invasive? An Examination of Psychological Barriers to the Acceptance of Awareness Monitoring Systems, Journal of Organizational Behavior (23), 605-633.

Zweig, D., and Webster, J. 2003. Personality as a Moderator of Monitoring Acceptance, Computers in Human Behavior (19), 479-493.

Zwick, D., and Dholakia, N. (2004). Whose Identity Is It Anyway? Consumer Representation in the Age of Database Marketing, Journal of Macromarketing 24(1), 31-43.

Idée / dominante :

La collecte de « big data » sur internet, bien plus qu’un phénomène technique, est devenue quasi- automatique et dépasse souvent les individus ainsi que les groupes à l’origine de cette collecte. Une grande partie de ces données n’est pas exploitée et se posent alors certaines questions éthiques comme celle du stockage de telles quantités d’information, celle de leur propriété, ou encore celle de leur espérance de vie. Les auteurs insistent sur l’importance de l’engagement d’un débat sur ces points.

Résumé :

Le concept de « big data » se définit comme conséquence de trois faits :

1) Une conséquence de l’intersection des différentes innovations technologiques des dernières années, permettant un plus grand stockage, ainsi qu’une plus grande vitesse d’échange et une plus grande variété d’informations échangées (selon IBM, en 2011, 90% de toute la data du monde a été produite au cours des deux années précédentes).

2) La valeur commerciale attribuée à ces données d’un nouveau type (issue par exemple d’application de géolocalisation pour smartphones), permettant aux organisations de générer automatiquement des insights (ce qui prenant beaucoup plus de temps auparavant), type d’information important pour la compréhension du comportement du consommateur.

3) Quatre challenges liés à la confidentialité :
Le glissement des politiques de confidentialité vers des domaines

Idée / dominante :

En matière de e-commerce, la perception par le consommateur de la politique de protection des données («privacy») et son reflet, en termes de «design» sur le site internet, impactent positivement la confiance de l’individu en le site concerné. Ce niveau de confiance impacte également positivement les intentions de comportement (« behavioral intentions ») du consommateur.

Résumé :

Les avantages du e-commerce ne sont plus à démontrer, que ce soit du côté des entreprises ou des clients. Pour actionner un nouveau levier de croissance, les entreprises se doivent de mieux comprendre leurs clients et ainsi construire une relation solide avec eux. Aujourd’hui, il existe beaucoup de techniques permettant de recueillir des données clients (cookies, tracking, formulaires d’inscription…). Le but étant d’adapter l’offre aux besoins des consommateurs. Cela soulève un paradoxe, car, bien qu’ils jouissent de ces offres adaptées, les consommateurs se montrent de plus en plus inquiets quant à la protection de leurs données personnelles. En effet, une étude de Hoffman et Novak (1999) montré que 95% des personnes qu’ils avaient sondés ont refusé de fournir des informations personnelles les concernant sur des sites internet. Cela engendre une baisse de la confiance accordée au vendeur. Certaines études ont aussi montré que les transactions B2B étaient moins efficaces si la confiance envers le partenaire était faible. Ces inquiétudes liées à la « privacy » sont de plus en plus prégnantes, particulièrement depuis que les SI ont permis la collecte, le stockage, l’usage et le partage des informations clients. Les inquiétudes liées au e-commerce s’appliquent aussi bien au B2C (le plus épineux car la relation avec le consommateur est directe), qu’au B2B (avec la question de la transmission d’information à un tiers) et qu’aux transactions intra-organisationnelles.

Selon Hoffman et Novak (1999), le manque de confiance en la transaction en ligne est la première raison pour laquelle un consommateur ne veut pas y dévoiler ses informations. Une bonne relation client suggère que l’entreprise décrive explicitement sa politique et ses pratiques en termes de protection des données. En échange, le consommateur doit être prêt à dévoiler ses données personnelles pour renforcer cette relation.

Pour valider leur modèle de recherche, les auteurs ont recueilli 212 réponses à un questionnaire soumis à deux groupes d’internautes (de 106 personnes chacun). Les sujets du premier groupe étaient confrontés à l’expérimentation d’un site de e-commerce présentant un bas niveau de « privacy », tandis que les participants du second groupe ont utilisé un site à haut niveau de « privacy » pour faire leur achat (9 caractéristiques, dont charte de confidentialité, label, page de vérification, etc.). Les mesures étaient effectuées grâce à une échelle de Likert 7 points

Les chercheurs ont ainsi pu valider leur modèle – en concédant certaines limites (type et taille de l’échantillon, nationalité…) – selon lequel l’observation de chacune des 4 pratiques informationnelles énumérées par la Commission Fédérale du Commerce Américaine* (US FTC) impacte positivement le degré de confiance accordé au site de e-commerce concerné. Ce degré de confiance a, à son tour, un impact positif sur chacune des intentions comportementales des consommateurs recensées. Parmi ces intentions, on compte celle d’un nouvel achat sur le site, celle d’une nouvelle visite, la recommandation à un proche, et les commentaires positifs.

Modèle : PRIVACY ==(+)==> TRUST ==(+)==> BEHAVIORAL INTENTIONS
* notice (information, en amont, de la collecte de données), access (donner le contrôle aux individus sur le type d’information qu’ils doivent fournir), choice (donner le choix d’autoriser ou non l’entreprise à partager l’information recueillie) & security (garantie de la sûreté de l’information recueillie).

Notes d’intérêt pour la recherche en cours :

Moyens d’améliorer la confiance du consommateur, qui impacte son intention de comportement.

Ce qui n’a pas été abordé :

L’article est basé sur les sites de e-commerce. Cela peut être étendu dans le domaine des réseaux sociaux. Ce modèle est-il applicable? D’autre part, les intentions de comportement se traduisent-elles en faits réels ? La recherche est basée sur un échantillon d’étudiants. Il conviendrait d’élargir ce schéma en ce demandant si les variables démographiques affectent ce modèle.

Idée / dominante :

Dans le e-commerce, la « disposition to privacy », ou aspiration générale d’un individu à la protection de ses données personnelles (fonction d’éventuelles expériences préalables), la réputation perçue du site internet et la familiarité personnelle avec ledit site ont une influence sur la naissance d’inquiétudes et de craintes, ressenties par les consommateurs, liées à la confidentialité.

Résumé :

L’article se concentre sur le e-commerce, aux yeux du consommateur, alors que ce domaine est souvent étudié du point de vue organisationnel. Il s’agit plus précisément d’étudier l’influence de la « disposition to privacy » (ou degré d’importance donné à la confidentialité des informations), de la familiarité personnelle avec un site internet, et de la perception de la réputation de ce site sur les différentes inquiétudes liées à la protection des données pouvant naître lors d’une expérience sur un site de e- commerce. L’auteur rappelle ici qu’il s’agit d’un type précis d’inquiétudes liées à l’utilisation d’internet, et défend l’idée selon laquelle il y a inquiétude lorsque le seuil d’exigence du consommateur n’est pas atteint. Autrement dit, son expérience ne parvient pas à la hauteur de ses attentes. Plusieurs facteurs peuvent influencer cette inquiétude : la réputation du site, la politique de confidentialité, les assurances de confidentialité (notamment les labels délivrées par une instance tierce => importance minime, cf autres travaux), la sensibilité de l’information délivrée et sa pertinence, la confiance et le degré de présence sociale, la perception du contrôle personnel sur sa « privacy », ainsi que l’importance que l’individu y attache (i.e. « disposition to privacy »).

Pour répondre à son modèle de recherche, l’auteur a créé un questionnaire dont les 28 items étaient répartis de la façon suivante : degré d’importance de la « privacy », réputation du site, familiarité avec le site, inquiétudes propres au site, bénéfice perçu, expérience préalable avec les problématiques de confidentialité, comportement envisagé. Ce questionnaire, soumis à un échantillon représentatif de la société américaine, a reçu 110 réponses exploitables (taux de participation de 32,9%).

Hypothèses de recherche validées par l’étude empirique :

• le degré d’importance donnée à la « privacy » (« disposition to privacy ») a une influence positive sur les inquiétudes des consommateurs (plus le consommateur attache de l’importance à la protection de ses données, plus celui-ci sera inquiet),
• la perception de la réputation du site internet (de e-commerce) a une influence négative sur les inquiétudes,
• la familiarité du consommateur avec le site internet considéré a une influence négative sur les inquiétudes,
• la confrontation préalable de l’individu à une situation présentant des risques pour la protection de ses données impacte positivement le degré d’importance donné à la « privacy »,
• plus le consommateur est inquiet, moins il est enclin à utiliser le site internet considéré (impactnégatif).L’étude relate également que l’introduction de variables démographiques et sociales (âge, sexe, éducation) ont un impact non-significatif sur le degré d’importance donné à la protection des données.

Notes d’intérêt pour la recherche en cours :

Revue de la littérature sur les attributs de la « disposition to privacy », synthèse de travaux de Westin (1967), Altman (1975, 1976) et Laufer & Wolfe (1977), approfondissement des travaux de Xu et al. (2011) en incluant des facteurs contextuels.

Ce qui n’a pas été abordé :

Article centré sur le e-commerce. Dans quelle mesure, peut-on étendre ces enseignements à l’utilisation des réseaux sociaux ? L’utilisation de variables démographiques et sociales pour comprendre comment le consommateur appréhende un site internet (en termes de fiabilité/réputation/familiarité) n’est pas relatée ici.