research-article

A cross-cultural framework for protecting user privacy in online social media

Authors:

Yang WangAuthors Info & Claims

WWW '13 Companion: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web

Pages 755 - 762

https://doi.org/10.1145/2487788.2488037

Published: 13 May 2013 Publication History

Abstract

Social media has become truly global in recent years. We argue that support for users' privacy, however, has not been extended equally to all users from around the world. In this paper, we survey existing literature on cross-cultural privacy issues, giving particular weight to work specific to online social networking sites. We then propose a framework for evaluating the extent to which social networking sites' privacy options are offered and communicated in a manner that supports diverse users from around the world. One aspect of our framework focuses on cultural issues, such as norms regarding the use of pseudonyms or posting of photographs. A second aspect of our framework discusses legal issues in cross-cultural privacy, including data-protection requirements and questions of jurisdiction. The final part of our framework delves into user expectations regarding the data-sharing practices and the communication of privacy information. The framework can enable service providers to identify potential gaps in support for user privacy. It can also help researchers, regulators, or consumer advocates reason systematically about cultural differences related to privacy in social media.

References

[1]

A. A. Adams, K. Murata, and Y. Orito. The Japanese sense of information privacy. AI Soc., 24(4):327--341, Oct. 2009.

Digital Library

[2]

M. Al-Hamar, R. Dawson, and L. Guan. A culture of trust threatens security and privacy in Qatar. In Proc. CIT, 2010.

Digital Library

[3]

K. S. Al Omoush, S. G. Yaseen, and M. Atwah Alma'Aitah. The impact of Arab cultural values on online social networking: The case of Facebook. CHB, 28(6), Nov. 2012.

Digital Library

[4]

A. I. Antón, J. B. Earp, and J. D. Young. How Internet users' privacy concerns have evolved since 2002. IEEE Security and Privacy, 8(1):21--27, Jan. 2010.

Digital Library

[5]

S. Bellman, E. J. Johnson, S. J. Kobrin, and G. Lohse. International differences in information privacy concerns: A global survey of consumers. IS, 20(5):313--324, 2004.

[6]

Bitly Science Team. Breakdown of traffic from social networks by country. www.bit.ly/XqP68l, 2013.

[7]

J. Bonneau and R. Xu. Of contraseñas, sysmawt, and mìma: Character encoding issues for web passwords. W2SP, 2012.

[8]

d. boyd. Friendster and publicly articulated social networks. In Proc. CHI, 2004.

Digital Library

[9]

d. boyd. The politics of "real names". CACM, 55(8), 2012.

Digital Library

[10]

L. A. Bygrave. Privacy and data protection in an international perspective. www.scandinavianlaw.se, 2010.

[11]

P. W. Cardon, B. Marshall, J. Choi, M. M. El-Shinnaway, M. North, L. Svensson, S. Wang, D. T. Noris, L. Cui, N. Goreva, V. Raungpaka, A. Usluata, C. Whelan, J. Cho, C. Collier, S. Nillson, G. Ravid, and J. P. Valenzuala. Online and offline social ties of social network website users: An exploratory study in eleven societies. JCIS, 50(1), 2009.

[12]

M. M. Caruana and J. A. Cannataci. European Union privacy and data protection principles: Compatibility with culture and legal frameworks in Islamic states. ICTL, 16(2):99--124, June 2007.

Digital Library

[13]

C. N. Chapman and M. Lahav. International ethnographic observation of social networking sites. In CHI EA, 2008.

Digital Library

[14]

G.-M. Chen. Differences in self-disclosure patterns among Americans versus Chinese. JCCP, 26(1):84--91, 1995.

[15]

H.-G. Chen, C. C. Chen, L. Lo, and S. C. Yang. Online privacy control via anonymity and pseudonym: Cross-cultural implications. BIT, 27(3):229--242, May 2008.

Digital Library

[16]

H. Cho, M. Rivera-Sánchez, and S. S. Lim. A multinational study on online privacy: Global concerns and local responses. NMS, 11(3):395--416, May 2009.

[17]

J. Constine. Facebook will fight German anonymity law and $26k fine against Zuckerberg to keep real name policy. Techcrunch, January 2013.

[18]

T. Correa and S. H. Jeong. Race and online content creation: Why minorities are actively participating in the Web. ICS, 14(5), 2011.

[19]

R. Cullen. Citizens' concerns about the privacy of personal information held by government: A comparative study, Japan and New Zealand. In Proc. HICSS, 2008.

Digital Library

[20]

C. Ess. Ethical pluralism and global information ethics. EIT, 8(4):215--226, Nov. 2006.

Digital Library

[21]

B. Friedman, K. Hook, B. Gill, L. Eidmar, C. S. Prien, and R. Severson. Personlig integritet: A comparative study of perceptions of privacy in public places in Sweden and the United States. In Proc. NordiCHI, 2008.

Digital Library

[22]

E. Hargittai. Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. JCMC, 13(1):14, 2007.

Digital Library

[23]

E. Hargittai and E. Litt. The tweet smell of celebrity success: Explaining variation in Twitter adoption among a diverse group of young adults. NMS, 13(5):824--842, 2011.

[24]

K. Hill. How Facebook secretly aids government searches. Forbes, July 2011.

[25]

G. Hofstede. Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. SAGE, 1980.

[26]

G. Hofstede. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. SAGE, 2001.

[27]

P. Ifinedo. IT security and privacy issues in global financial services institutions: Do socio-economic and cultural factors matter? In Proc. PST, 2008.

Digital Library

[28]

A. Imre. National intimacy and post-socialist networking. EJCS, 12(2):219--233, May 2009.

[29]

I. Ion, N. Sachdeva, P. Kumaraguru, and S. Capkun. Home is safer than the cloud!: Privacy concerns for consumer cloud storage. In Proc. SOUPS, 2011.

Digital Library

[30]

L. Irani, J. Vertesi, P. Dourish, K. Philip, and R. E. Grinter. Postcolonial computing: A lens on design and development. In Proc. CHI, 2010.

Digital Library

[31]

K. Karl, J. Peluchette, and C. Schlaegel. Who's posting faux pas? A cross-cultural examination of personality differences. IJSA, 18(2), June 2010.

[32]

S. Kisilevich and F. Mansmann. Analysis of privacy in online social networks of runet. In Proc. SIN, 2010.

Digital Library

[33]

K. Kitiyadisai. Privacy rights and protection: Foreign values in modern Thai context. EIT, 7(1):17--26, Mar. 2005.

Digital Library

[34]

H. Krasnova and N. F. Veltri. Privacy calculus on social networking sites: Explorative evidence from Germany and USA. In Proc. HICSS, 2010.

Digital Library

[35]

P. Kumaraguru and L. Cranor. Privacy in India: Attitudes and awareness. In Proc. PET, 2005.

Digital Library

[36]

P. Kumaraguru and N. Sachdeva. Privacy in India: Attitudes and awareness v 2.0. Technical Report PreCog-TR-12-001, November 2012.

[37]

B. A. Marshall, P. W. Cardon, D. T. Norris, N. Goreva, and R. D'Souza. Social networking websites in India and the United States: A cross-national comparison of online privacy and communication. IIS, 9(2), 2008.

[38]

B. McSweeney. Hofstede's model of national cultural differences and their consequences: A triumph of faith - a failure of analysis. Human Relations, 55(89), 2002.

[39]

N. Messieh. Facebook is killing local social networks around the world. The Next Web, January 2012.

[40]

S. J. Milberg, S. J. Burke, H. J. Smith, and E. A. Kallman. Values, personal information privacy, and regulatory approaches. CACM, 38(12):65--74, Dec. 1995.

Digital Library

[41]

M. Mizutani, J. Dorsey, and J. H. Moor. The Internet and Japanese conception of privacy. EIT, 6(2), June 2004.

Digital Library

[42]

R. Myslewski. Google misses privacy-policy deadline, incurs EU wrath. The Register, February 2013.

[43]

M. Nakada and T. Tamura. Japanese conceptions of privacy: An intercultural perspective. EIT, 7(1):27--36, Mar. 2005.

Digital Library

[44]

S. Patil, A. Kobsa, A. John, and D. Seligmann. Comparing privacy attitudes of knowledge workers in the U.S. and India. In Proc. ICIC, 2010.

Digital Library

[45]

A. Peters, M. Oren, and N. Bidwell. Namibian and American cultural orientations toward Facebook. In CHI EA, 2012.

Digital Library

[46]

S. Petronio. Boundaries of Privacy: Dialectics of Disclosure. SUNY Press, 2002.

[47]

K. Reinecke and A. Bernstein. Improving performance, perceived usability, and aesthetics with culturally adaptive user interfaces. ToCHI, 18(2), June 2011.

Digital Library

[48]

K. Reinecke, M. K. Nguyen, A. Bernstein, M. Näf, and K. Z. Gajos. Doodle around the world: Online scheduling behavior reflects cultural differences in time perception and group decision-making. In Proc. CSCW, 2013.

Digital Library

[49]

C. Röcker. Information privacy in smart office environments: a cross-cultural study analyzing the willingness of users to share context information. In Proc. ICCSA, 2010.

Digital Library

[50]

D. Rosen, M. A. Stefanone, and D. Lackaff. Online and offline social networks: Investigating culturally-specific behavior and satisfaction. In Proc. HICSS, 2010.

Digital Library

[51]

J. Rui and M. A. Stefanone. Strategic self-presentation online: A cross-cultural study. CHB, 29(1):110--118, 2013.

Digital Library

[52]

J. Sharrock. How Facebook plans to make us all get along. BuzzFeed, January 2013.

[53]

B. Ur, M. Sleeper, and L. F. Cranor. {Privacy, Privacidad, Privatnost} policies in social media: Providing translated privacy notice. In PSOSM, 2012.

Digital Library

[54]

B. Ur and Y. Wang. Online social networks in a post-Soviet state: How Hungarians protect and share on Facebook. In Proc. iConference, 2012.

Digital Library

[55]

E. Vitkauskaite. Overview of research on cross-cultural impact on social networking sites. EM, 15:844--848, 2010.

[56]

E. Vitkauskaite. Cultural adaptation issues in social networking sites. EM, 16:1348--1355, 2011.

[57]

M. Voronov and J. A. Singer. The myth of individualism-collectivism: A critical review. JSP, 142(4):461--480, 2002.

[58]

Y. Wang, G. Norcie, and L. F. Cranor. Who is concerned about what? A study of American, Chinese and Indian users' privacy concerns on social network sites. In Proc. TRUST, 2011.

Digital Library

[59]

M. Warman. Online right "to be forgotten" confirmed by EU. Telegraph, March 2011.

[60]

Y. Wu, T. Lau, D. J. Atkin, and C. A. Lin. A comparative study of online privacy regulations in the U.S. and China. Telecommun. Policy, 35(7):603--616, Aug. 2011.

[61]

L. Yao-Huai. Privacy and data privacy issues in contemporary China. EIT, 7(1):7--15, Mar. 2005.

Digital Library

[62]

S. J. Yoo and W.-H. D. Huang. Comparison of Web 2.0 technology acceptance level based on cultural differences. ETS, 14(4):241--252, 2011.

[63]

M. Yuki, W. W. Maddux, M. B. Brewer, and K. Takemura. Cross-cultural differences in relationship- and group-based trust. PSPB, 31(1):48--62, 2005.

[64]

S. A. M. Yusof and N. Zakaria. Islamic perspective: Virtual worlds as a western-centric technology. SIGMIS Database, 38(4):100--103, Oct. 2007.

Digital Library

[65]

C. Zhao, P. Hinds, and G. Gao. How and to whom people share: The role of culture in self-disclosure in online communities. In Proc. CSCW, 2012.

Digital Library

[66]

C. Zhao and G. Jiang. Cultural differences on visual self-presentation through social networking site profile images. In Proc. CHI, 2011.

Digital Library

[67]

X. Zhao, N. Salehi, S. Naranjit, S. Alwaalan, S. Voida, and D. Cosley. The many faces of Facebook: Experiencing social media as performance, exhibition, and personal archive. In Proc. CHI, 2013.

Digital Library

Cited By

Zha XLu ZYan Y(2024)Satisfaction with Behavior Trajectory Security Protection in Social Media Intelligent RecommendationsLibri10.1515/libri-2023-0079Online publication date: 9-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1515/libri-2023-0079
Naresh Rao H. (2024)Ethics of Digital JournalismHandbook of Digital Journalism10.1007/978-981-99-6675-2_46(545-553)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6675-2_46
Kanamori SIkeda MKameishi KHasegawa A(2024)Japanese Users’ (Mis)understandings of Technical Terms Used in Privacy Policies and the Privacy Protection LawHCI for Cybersecurity, Privacy and Trust10.1007/978-3-031-61379-1_16(245-264)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61379-1_16
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A cross-cultural framework for protecting user privacy in online social media
1. Security and privacy
  1. Human and societal aspects of security and privacy
2. Social and professional topics
  1. Computing / technology policy
    1. Privacy policies

Recommendations

Online engagement in social media: A cross-cultural comparison
Abstract
Online engagement is prevalent in society but can be stressful because many debates are controversial. Further, online engagement has become a global phenomenon, and individuals from different cultural backgrounds discuss political and ...
Highlights
- Privacy plays an important role in the process of online engagement.
- Culture ...
A cross-cultural comparison of Croatian and American social network sites

Although Instagram is one of the fastest growing social media, scholars are yet to examine cultural differences among users behavior. The current study compares motives for Instagram use between participants from two countries: Croatia, a highly ...
Online social networks in a post-Soviet state: how Hungarians protect and share on Facebook
iConference '12: Proceedings of the 2012 iConference

As Facebook has become global, users from different cultural and socio-political contexts have joined the site. We present a case study investigating how both current and historical political events, as well as the migration from a local social ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

WWW '13 Companion: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web

May 2013

1636 pages

ISBN:9781450320382

DOI:10.1145/2487788

General Chairs:
Daniel Schwabe
PUC-Rio - Brazil
,
Virgílio Almeida
UFMG - Brazil
,
Hartmut Glaser
CGI.br - Brazil
,
Program Chairs:
Ricardo Baeza-Yates
Yahoo! Labs - Spain & Chile
,
Sue Moon
KAIST - South Korea

Copyright © 2013 Copyright is held by the International World Wide Web Conference Committee (IW3C2).

Sponsors

NICBR: Nucleo de Informatcao e Coordenacao do Ponto BR
CGIBR: Comite Gestor da Internet no Brazil

In-Cooperation

SIGWEB: ACM Special Interest Group on Hypertext, Hypermedia, and Web

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 May 2013

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

WWW '13

Sponsor:

NICBR
CGIBR

WWW '13: 22nd International World Wide Web Conference

May 13 - 17, 2013

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Acceptance Rates

WWW '13 Companion Paper Acceptance Rate 831 of 1,250 submissions, 66%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,899 of 8,196 submissions, 23%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

38
Total Citations
View Citations
1,617
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)85
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8

Reflects downloads up to 19 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Zha XLu ZYan Y(2024)Satisfaction with Behavior Trajectory Security Protection in Social Media Intelligent RecommendationsLibri10.1515/libri-2023-0079Online publication date: 9-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1515/libri-2023-0079
Naresh Rao H. (2024)Ethics of Digital JournalismHandbook of Digital Journalism10.1007/978-981-99-6675-2_46(545-553)Online publication date: 3-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6675-2_46
Kanamori SIkeda MKameishi KHasegawa A(2024)Japanese Users’ (Mis)understandings of Technical Terms Used in Privacy Policies and the Privacy Protection LawHCI for Cybersecurity, Privacy and Trust10.1007/978-3-031-61379-1_16(245-264)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-61379-1_16
Neubaum GMetzger MKrämer NKyewski E(2023)How Subjective Norms Relate to Personal Privacy Regulation in Social Media: A Cross-National ApproachSocial Media + Society10.1177/205630512311823659:3Online publication date: 16-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051231182365
Herbert FBecker SSchaewitz LHielscher JKowalewski MSasse AAcar YDürmuth M(2023)A World Full of Privacy and Security (Mis)conceptions? Findings of a Representative Survey in 12 CountriesProceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3581410(1-23)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3581410
Seberger JPatil S(2022)Beyond the Pandemic and Privacy Concerns: Perceived Benefit and Expected Use of Pandemic-Tracking Apps in IndiaProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35555966:CSCW2(1-29)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3555596
Wilkinson DKnijnenburg B(2022)Many Islands, Many Problems: An Empirical Examination of Online Safety Behaviors in the CaribbeanProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517643(1-25)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517643
Wu YEdwards WDas S(2022)SoK: Social Cybersecurity2022 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP)10.1109/SP46214.2022.9833757(1863-1879)Online publication date: May-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/SP46214.2022.9833757
Li YCho HAnaraky RKnijnenburg BKobsa A(2022)Antecedents of collective privacy management in social network sites: a cross-country analysisCCF Transactions on Pervasive Computing and Interaction10.1007/s42486-022-00092-84:2(106-123)Online publication date: 4-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s42486-022-00092-8
Marín VCarpenter JTur GWilliamson-Leadley S(2022)Social media and data privacy in education: an international comparative study of perceptions among pre-service teachersJournal of Computers in Education10.1007/s40692-022-00243-x10:4(769-795)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-022-00243-x
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents