research-article

Public Access

Privacy Norms and Preferences for Photos Posted Online

Authors:

Qatrunnada Ismail,

David Crandall,

Denise AnthonyAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), Volume 27, Issue 4

Article No.: 30, Pages 1 - 27

https://doi.org/10.1145/3380960

Published: 03 August 2020 Publication History

All formats PDF

Abstract

We are surrounded by digital images of personal lives posted online. Changes in information and communications technology have enabled widespread sharing of personal photos, increasing access to aspects of private life previously less observable. Most studies of privacy online explore differences in individual privacy preferences. Here we examine privacy perceptions of online photos considering both social norms, collectively—shared expectations of privacy and individual preferences. We conducted an online factorial vignette study on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (n = 279). Our findings show that people share common expectations about the privacy of online images, and these privacy norms are socially contingent and multidimensional. Use of digital technologies to share personal photos is influenced by social context as well as individual preferences, while such sharing can affect the social meaning of privacy.

References

[1]

Alessandro Acquisti, Laura Brandimarte, and George Loewenstein. 2015. Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science 347, 6221 (Jan. 2015), 509--514.

[2]

Alessandro Acquisti, Leslie K. John, and George Loewenstein. 2012. The impact of relative standards on the propensity to disclose. Journal of Marketing Research 49 (Apr. 2012), 160--174.

[3]

Shane Ahern, Dean Eckles, Nathaniel Good, Simon King, Mor Naaman, and Rahul Nair. 2007. Over-exposed?: Privacy patterns and considerations in online and mobile photo sharing. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 357--366.

Digital Library

[4]

Taslima Akter, Bryan Dosono, Tousif Ahmed, Apu Kapadia, and Bryan Semaan. 2020. “I am uncomfortable sharing what I can’t see”: Privacy concerns of the visually impaired with camera based assistive applications. In 29th USENIX Security Symposium. USENIX Association, Boston, MA. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity20/presentation/akter.

[5]

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

[6]

Denise Anthony, Celeste Campos-Castillo, and Christine Horne. 2017. Toward a sociology of privacy. Annual Review of Sociology 43, 1 (Aug. 2017), 1--21.

[7]

Denise Anthony, Timothy Stablein, and Emily K. Carian. 2015. Big brother in the information age: Concerns about government information gathering over time. IEEE Security 8 Privacy 13, 4 (2015), 12--19.

[8]

France Belanger and Robert E. Crossler. 2011. Privacy in the digital age: A review of information privacy research in information systems. MIS Quarterly 35, 4 (Dec. 2011), 1017--1042.

Digital Library

[9]

danah boyd and Eszter Hargittai. 2010. Facebook privacy settings: Who cares? First Monday 15, 8 (Aug. 2010).

[10]

Simone Browne. 2015. Dark Matters: On the Surveillance of Blackness. Duke University Press, Durham, NC.

[11]

Celeste Campos-Castillo and Denise L. Anthony. 2014. The double-edged sword of electronic health records: Implications for patient disclosure. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 22, e1 (Jul. 2014), e130--e140.

[12]

Jaeyoung Choi, Martha Larson, Xinchao Li, Kevin Li, Gerald Friedland, and Alan Hanjalic. 2017. The geo-privacy bonus of popular photo enhancements. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on International Conference on Multimedia Retrieval. ACM, New York, NY, 84--92.

Digital Library

[13]

Robert B. Cialdini, Carl A. Kallgren, and Raymond R. Reno. 1991. A Focus Theory of Normative Conduct: A Theoretical Refinement and Reevaluation of the Role of Norms in Human Behavior. Elsevier.

[14]

Sunny Consolvo, Ian E. Smith, Tara Matthews, Anthony LaMarca, Jason Tabert, and Pauline Powledge. 2005. Location disclosure to social relations: Why, when, 8 what people want to share. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 81--90.

Digital Library

[15]

Tamara Denning, Zakariya Dehlawi, and Tadayoshi Kohno. 2014. In situ with bystanders of augmented reality glasses. In The 32nd Annual ACM Conference. ACM, New York, NY, 2377--2386.

Digital Library

[16]

Maeve Duggan. 2015. Mobile Messaging and Social Media - 2015. Pew Research Center Technical Report. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC

[17]

Amitai Etzioni. 1999. The Limits of Privacy. Basic Books, New York, NY.

[18]

Lujun Fang and Kristen LeFevre. 2010. Privacy wizards for social networking sites. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 351--360.

Digital Library

[19]

Casey Fiesler and Nicholas Proferes. 2018. “Participant” perceptions of Twitter research ethics. Social Media + Society 4, 1 (March 2018), 205630511876336-14.

[20]

Gary A. Fine. 2001. Enacting norms: Mushrooming and the culture of expectations and explanations. In Social Norms, Michael Hechter and Karl-Dieter Opp (Eds.). Russell Sage, New York, NY, 139--164.

[21]

Claude S. Fischer. 1992. America Calling: A Social History of the Telephone to 1940. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

Digital Library

[22]

Vaibhav Garg, Kevin Benton, and L. Jean Camp. 2014. The privacy paradox: A Facebook case study. In Proceedings of the 42nd Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy.

[23]

Erving Goffman. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Doubleday, New York, NY.

[24]

Jens Grossklags and Alessandro Acquisti. 2007. When 25 cents is too much—an experiment on willingness-to-sell and willingness-to-protect personal information. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on the Economics of Information Security.

[25]

Vincent Toubiana, Vincent Verdot, Benoit Christophe, and Mathieu Boussard. 2012. Photo-TaPE: User privacy preferences in photo tagging. WWW 2012 (2012), 617.

[26]

Rakibul Hasan, Eman Hassan, Yifang Li, Kelly Caine, David J. Crandall, Roberto Hoyle, and Apu Kapadia. 2018. Viewer experience of obscuring scene elements in photos to enhance privacy. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM.

Digital Library

[27]

Eman T. Hassan, Rakibul Hasan, Patrick Shaffer, David Crandall, and Apu Kapadia. 2017. Cartooning for enhanced privacy in lifelogging and streaming videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshop on Computer Vision Challenges and Opportunities for Privacy and Security. IEEE, 29--38.

[28]

Michael Hechter and Karl-Dieter Opp (Eds.). 2001. Social Norms. Russell Sage, New York, NY.

[29]

Melissa R. Herman. 2010. Do you see what i am? Social Psychology Quarterly 73, 1 (Jan. 2010), 58--78.

[30]

Christine Horne. 2001. Sociological perspectives on social norms. In Social Norms, Michael Hechter and Karl-Dieter Opp (Eds.). Russell Sage, New York, NY, 3--34.

[31]

Christine Horne, Brice Darras, Elyse Bean, Anurag Srivastava, and Scott Frickel. 2015. Privacy, technology, and norms: The case of Smart Meters. Social Science Research 51, C (May 2015), 64--76.

[32]

Roberto Hoyle, Robert Templeman, Denise Anthony, David Crandall, and Apu Kapadia. 2015. Sensitive lifelogs: A Privacy Analysis of Photos from Wearable Cameras. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 1645--1648.

Digital Library

[33]

Roberto Hoyle, Robert Templeman, Steven Armes, Denise Anthony, David Crandall, and Apu Kapadia. 2014. Privacy behaviors of lifeloggers using wearable cameras. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. ACM, New York, NY, 571--582.

Digital Library

[34]

Sarah Igo. 2018. The Known Citizen: A History of Privacy in Modern America. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

[35]

S. Jana, A. Narayanan, and V. Shmatikov. 2013. A scanner darkly: Protecting user privacy from perceptual applications. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) Conference. IEEE, 349--363.

[36]

Guillermina Jasso. 2006. Factorial survey methods for studying beliefs and judgments. Sociological Methods 8 Research 34, 3 (Jun. 2006), 334--423.

[37]

Guillermina Jasso and Karl-Dieter Opp. 1997. Probing the character of norms: A factorial survey analysis of the norms of political action. American Sociological Review 62, 6 (Dec. 1997), 947--964.

[38]

Carlos Jensen, Colin Potts, and Christian Jensen. 2005. Privacy practices of Internet users: Self-reports versus observed behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 63, 1--2 (Jul. 2005), 203--227.

Digital Library

[39]

Leslie K. John, Alessandro Acquisti, and George Loewenstein. 2011. Strangers on a plane: Context-dependent willingness to divulge sensitive information. Journal of Consumer Research 37, 5 (Feb. 2011), 858--873.

[40]

Ruogu Kang, Stephanie Brown, Laura Dabbish, and Sara B. Kiesler. 2014. Privacy attitudes of Mechanical Turk workers and the U.S. public. In Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security. 37--49

[41]

Peter F. Klemperer, Yuan Liang, Michelle L. Mazurek, Manya Sleeper, Blase Ur, Lujo Bauer, Nitin Gupta Cranor, Lorrie Faith, and Michael K. Reiter. 2012. Tag, you can see it!: Using tags for access control in photo sharing. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 377.

[42]

Mohammed Korayem, Robert Templeman, Dennis Chen, David Crandall, and Apu Kapadia. 2016. Enhancing lifelogging privacy by detecting screens. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New York, NY, 4309--4314.

Digital Library

[43]

Jessica Lake. 2016. The Face that Launched a Thousand Lawsuits: The American Women Who Forged a Right to Privacy. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.

[44]

Yifang Li, Wyatt Troutman, Bart P. Knijnenburg, and Kelly Caine. 2018. Human perceptions of sensitive content in photos. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops.

[45]

Yifang Li, Nishant Vishwamitra, Bart P. Knijnenburg, Hongxin Hu, and Kelly Caine. 2017. Effectiveness and users’ experience of obfuscation as a privacy-enhancing technology for sharing photos. In Proceedings of the ACM on Human--Computer Interaction, Vol. 1. ACM, 1--24.

Digital Library

[46]

David Lyon. 1994. The Electronic Eye: The Rise of Surveillance Society. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.

[47]

David Lyon. 2007. Surveillance Studies: An Overview. Polity Press, Cambridge.

[48]

Marry Madden. 2012. Privacy Management on Social Media Sites. Pew Research Center Technical Report. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC.

[49]

Charles Madge. 1950. Private and public spaces. Human Relations 3, 2 (Jun. 1950), 187--199.

[50]

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

Digital Library

[51]

Jenny Marder and Mike Fritz. 2015. The Internet’s hidden science factory. Retrieved from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/inside-amazons-hidden-science-factory.

[52]

Kirsten Martin and Katie Shilton. 2015. Why experience matters to privacy: How context-based experience moderates consumer privacy expectations for mobile applications. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67, 8 (May 2015), 1871--1882.

[53]

Kirsten E. Martin and Helen Nissenbaum. 2017. Measuring privacy: Using context to expose confounding variables. The Columbia Science 8 Technology Law Review 18, 1 (2017), 176.

[54]

Gary T. Marx. 2016. Windows into the Soul: Surveillance and Society in an Age of High Technology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

[55]

Barrington Moore Jr. 1984. Privacy: Studies in Social and Cultural History. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.

[56]

Pardis Emami Naeini, Sruti Bhagavatula, Hana Habib, Martin Degeling, Lujo Bauer, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Norman M. Sadeh. 2017. Privacy expectations and preferences in an IoT world. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security.

[57]

Gina Neff and Laura Robinson. 2012. The social matrix of the emergent web: Governance, exchange, participation, 8 engagement. Information, Communication 8 Society 15, 4 (2012), 449--454.

[58]

Christena Nippert-Eng. 2010. Islands of Privacy: Selective Concealment and Disclosure in Everyday Life. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.

[59]

Helen Nissenbaum. 2004. Will security enhance trust online, or supplant it? In Trust and Distrust in Organizations: Dilemmas and Approaches, Roderick M. Kramer and Karen S. Cook (Eds.). Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY, 155--188.

[60]

Helen Nissenbaum. 2010. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford Law Books, Palo Alto, CA.

Digital Library

[61]

Helen Nissenbaum. 2018. Respecting context to protect privacy: Why meaning matters. Science and Engineering Ethics 24, 3 (2018), 831--852.

[62]

Greg Norcie and L. Jean Camp. 2015. The price of privacy: An examination of the economic costs of abstention from social network. In Proceedings of the Amsterdam Privacy Conference.

[63]

Alfredo J. Perez, Sherali Zeadally, and Scott Griffith. 2017. Bystanders’ privacy. IT Professional 19, 3 (2017), 61--65.

Digital Library

[64]

Sandra Petronio. 2002. Boundaries of Privacy: Dialectics of Disclosure. SUNY Press, New York, NY.

[65]

Aarathi Prasad, Jacob Sorber, Timothy Stablein, Denise Anthony, and David Kotz. 2012. Understanding sharing preferences and behavior for mHealth devices. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, 117--128.

Digital Library

[66]

Blaine A. Price, Avelie Stuart, Gul Calikli, Ciaran Mccormick, Vikram Mehta, Luke Hutton, Arosha K. Bandara, Mark Levine, and Bashar Nuseibeh. 2017. Logging you, logging me: A replicable study of privacy and sharing behaviour in groups of visual lifeloggers. In Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies. Article 22.

Digital Library

[67]

Yasmeen Rashidi, Tousif Ahmed, Felicia Patel, Emily Fath, Apu Kapadia, Christena Nippert-Eng, and Norman Makoto Su. 2018. “You don’t want to be the next meme”: College students’ workarounds to manage privacy in the era of pervasive photography. In Proceedings of the 14th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security. USENIX Association, Baltimore, MD, 143--157. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/conference/soups2018/presentation/rashidi.

[68]

Priscilla M. Regan. 1995. Legislating Privacy: Technology, Social Values, and Public Policy. University of North Carolina Press, Raleigh, NC.

Digital Library

[69]

Reinhard Schunck. 2013. Within and between estimates in random-effects models: Advantages and drawbacks of correlated random effects and hybrid models. Stata Journal 13, 1 (2013), 65--76.

[70]

Reinhard Schunck and Francisco Perales. 2017. Within- and between-cluster effects in generalized linear mixed models: A discussion of approaches and the xthybrid command. Stata Journal 17, 1 (2017), 89--115.

[71]

Stuart Shapiro. 1998. Places and spaces: The historical interaction of technology, home, and privacy. The Information Society 14, 4 (1998), 275--284.

[72]

Aaron Smith. 2017. Record shares of Americans have smartphones, home broadband. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/12/evolution-of-technology/.

[73]

Daniel J. Solove. 2008. Understanding Privacy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

[74]

Luke Stark. 2016. The emotional context of information privacy. The Information Society 32, 1 (2016), 14--27.

Digital Library

[75]

Robert Templeman, Apu Kapadia, Roberto Hoyle, and David Crandall. 2014. Reactive security. In Proceedings of The 2014 ACM International Joint Conference. ACM, New York, NY, 1297--1306.

Digital Library

[76]

Edison Thomaz, Aman Parnami, Jonathan Bidwell, Irfan Essa, and Gregory D. Abowd. 2013. Technological approaches for addressing privacy concerns when recognizing eating behaviors with wearable cameras. In Proceedings of The 2013 ACM International Joint Conference. ACM, New York, NY, 739--10.

[77]

Matt Tierney, Ian Spiro, Christoph Bregler, and Lakshminarayanan Subramanian. 2013. Cryptagram. In Proceedings of The 1st ACM Conference. ACM, New York, NY, 75--88.

[78]

Joseph Turow, Michael Hennessy, and Nora Draper. 2015. The tradeoff fallacy: How marketers are misrepresenting American consumers and opening them up to exploitation. SSRN Electronic Journal (2015). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2820060.

[79]

Dave Vannette. 2017. Using Attention Checks in Your Surveys May Harm Data Quality. Retrieved from https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/using-attention-checks-in-your-surveys-may-harm-data-quality/.

[80]

Samuel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis. [1890] 1984. The right to privacy [The implicit made explicit]. In Philosophical Dimensions of Privacy: An Anthology, Ferdinand Schoeman (Ed.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 75--103.

[81]

Jill Weinberg, Jeremy Freese, and David McElhattan. 2014. Comparing data characteristics and results of an online factorial survey between a population-based and a crowdsource-recruited sample. Sociological Science 1 (2014), 292--310.

[82]

Alan F. Westin. 1970. Privacy and Freedom. Athenaeum, New York, NY.

[83]

Alan F. Westin. 2003. Social and political dimensions of privacy. Journal of Social Issues 59, 2 (2003), 431--453.

[84]

Allison Woodruff. 2014. Necessary, unpleasant, and disempowering—reputation management in the internet age. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 149--158.

Digital Library

[85]

Anna Wu and Xiaolong Zhang. 2011. Temporal sensitivity for location disclosure through mobile photo-sharing. In Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on Mobile Location-Based Service. ACM, New York, NY, 67--70.

Digital Library

[86]

Yaxing Yao, Justin Reed Basdeo, Oriana Rosata Mcdonough, and Yang Wang. 2019. Privacy perceptions and designs of bystanders in smart homes. In Proceedings of the ACM on Human--Computer Interaction, Vol. 3. ACM, Article 59.

Digital Library

[87]

Jun Yu, Zhenzhong Kuang, Zhou Yu, Dan Lin, and Jianping Fan. 2018. Privacy setting recommendation for image sharing. In Proceedings of the 2017 16th IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications. IEEE, 726--730.

[88]

Jun Yu, Zhenzhong Kuang, Baopeng Zhang, Wei Zhang, Dan Lin, and Jianping Fan. 2018. Leveraging content sensitiveness and user trustworthiness to recommend fine-grained privacy settings for social image sharing. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 13, 5 (Jan. 2018), 1317--1332.

Digital Library

[89]

J. Yu, B. Zhang, Z. Kuang, and D. Lin. 2017. iPrivacy: Image privacy protection by identifying sensitive objects via deep multi-task learning. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 12, 5 (2017), 1005--1016.

Digital Library

[90]

Shoshana Zuboff. 2019. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs/Hachette, New York, NY.

[91]

Elia Zureik, L. Linda Harling Stalker, Emily Smith, David Lyon, and Yolande E. Chan (Eds.). 2010. Surveillance, Privacy, and the Globalization of Personal Information. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, QC.

Cited By

N. UG. AA. EA. E(2024)Intelligent System for Detection of Copyright-Protected Data for Enhanced Data SecurityBritish Journal of Computer, Networking and Information Technology10.52589/BJCNIT-OQQNPPCJ7:4(58-80)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.52589/BJCNIT-OQQNPPCJ
Windl MSchlegel MMayer S(2024)Exploring Users' Mental Models and Privacy Concerns During Interconnected InteractionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36765048:MHCI(1-23)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3676504
Windl MFeger S(2024)Designing Interactive Privacy Labels for Advanced Smart Home Device Configuration OptionsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661527(3372-3388)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643834.3661527
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Privacy Norms and Preferences for Photos Posted Online
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Collaborative and social computing
    1. Collaborative and social computing theory, concepts and paradigms
      1. Social content sharing
2. Security and privacy
  1. Human and societal aspects of security and privacy
    1. Social aspects of security and privacy

Recommendations

Towards A Taxonomy of Content Sensitivity and Sharing Preferences for Photos
CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Determining which photos are sensitive is difficult. Although emerging computer vision systems can label content items, previous attempts to distinguish private or sensitive content fall short. There is no human-centered taxonomy that describes what ...
Privacy Norms for Smart Home Personal Assistants
CHI '21: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Smart Home Personal Assistants (SPA) have a complex ecosystem that enables them to carry out various tasks on behalf of the user with just voice commands. SPA capabilities are continually growing, with over a hundred thousand third-party skills in ...
Privacy for Groups Online: Context Matters
CSCW

The pervasive influence of online activities in our lives, encompassing personal connections, professional engagements, and e-commerce, has amplified concerns about privacy. However, existing privacy research has predominantly concentrated on the ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction

ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction Volume 27, Issue 4

Special Issue on HCI and the Body:?Reimagining Women's Health and Regular Papers

August 2020

358 pages

ISSN:1073-0516

EISSN:1557-7325

DOI:10.1145/3411214

Editor:
Kristina Höök
KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2020 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 03 August 2020

Online AM: 07 May 2020

Accepted: 01 December 2019

Revised: 01 November 2019

Received: 01 April 2018

Published in TOCHI Volume 27, Issue 4

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Funding Sources

National Science Foundation
College of Computer and Information Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

26
Total Citations
View Citations
1,581
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)548
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)74

Reflects downloads up to 23 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

N. UG. AA. EA. E(2024)Intelligent System for Detection of Copyright-Protected Data for Enhanced Data SecurityBritish Journal of Computer, Networking and Information Technology10.52589/BJCNIT-OQQNPPCJ7:4(58-80)Online publication date: 17-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.52589/BJCNIT-OQQNPPCJ
Windl MSchlegel MMayer S(2024)Exploring Users' Mental Models and Privacy Concerns During Interconnected InteractionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36765048:MHCI(1-23)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3676504
Windl MFeger S(2024)Designing Interactive Privacy Labels for Advanced Smart Home Device Configuration OptionsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661527(3372-3388)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643834.3661527
Logas JGarg PArriaga RDas S(2024)The Subversive AI Acceptance Scale (SAIA-8): A Scale to Measure User Acceptance of AI-Generated, Privacy-Enhancing Image ModificationsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36410248:CSCW1(1-43)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641024
Xu AZhou ZMiyazaki KYoshikawa RHosio SYatani K(2024)DIPA2Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36314397:4(1-30)Online publication date: 12-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3631439
Bourgeus AVandercruysse LVerhulst N(2024)Understanding contextual expectations for sharing wearables' data: Insights from a vignette studyComputers in Human Behavior Reports10.1016/j.chbr.2024.10044315(100443)Online publication date: Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100443
Ruckelshausen SKamleitner BMitchell V(2024)Selling Who You Know: How We Justify Sharing Others’ DataJournal of Business Ethics10.1007/s10551-024-05649-4Online publication date: 23-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05649-4
Fischer-Hübner SKaregar FFischer-Hübner SKaregar F(2024)Overview of Usable Privacy Research: Major Themes and Research DirectionsThe Curious Case of Usable Privacy10.1007/978-3-031-54158-2_3(43-102)Online publication date: 20-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54158-2_3
Necaise ATanni TWilliams ASolihin YKapadia AAmon M(2023)User Preferences for Interdependent Privacy Preservation Strategies in Social MediaProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36100627:CSCW2(1-30)Online publication date: 4-Oct-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610062
Mottelson AMuresan AHornbæk KMakransky G(2023)A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Body Ownership Illusions in Virtual RealityACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction10.1145/359076730:5(1-42)Online publication date: 23-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3590767
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

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 Article

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents