research-article

No to cookies: : Empowering impact of technical and legal knowledge on rejecting tracking cookies

Authors:

Joanna Strycharz,

Natali Helberger,

Guda van NoortAuthors Info & Claims

Volume 120, Issue C

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106750

Published: 01 July 2021 Publication History

Abstract

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) introduced in 2018 in the EU aims to give consumers a high degree of control over their data online in order to allow them to protect their privacy. It also puts high transparency requirements for websites that collect and process data. In fact, consumers have to be informed about technical and legal aspects of data collection; this knowledge should empower them to consciously give or withdraw their consent for data collection. The current study investigates the empowering impact of technical and legal knowledge about online data collection within the theoretical framework of the Protection Motivation Theory, the Regulatory Focus Theory, and contextual integrity.

An online experiment in which participants are exposed to a technical or legal knowledge intervention in either commercial or news website context shows that receiving both kinds of information leads to lower threat appraisal. At the same time, having legal knowledge empowers consumers: it positively impacts their coping appraisal and motivation to reject online data collection. The study findings raise questions about the current transparency requirements about data collection and highlight the importance of legal knowledge as well as law enforcement for online privacy protection of consumers.

Highlights

•

Receiving technical and legal knowledge intervention does not increase individuals' motivation to reject tracking cookies.

•

Receiving technical or legal knowledge intervention lowers individuals' threat perceptions of online data collection.

•

Higher levels of legal knowledge increase individuals' coping appraisal and motivation to reject tracking cookies.

•

Not coping and threat appraisal, but privacy concern and attitude toward personalization impact motivation to reject cookies.

References

[1]

A. Acquisti, L. Brandimarte, G. Loewenstein, Privacy and human behavior in the age of information, Science 347 (6221) (2015),.

[2]

A. Acquisti, J. Grossklags, Privacy and rationality in individual decision making, IEEE Security and Privacy Magazine 3 (1) (2005) 26–33,.

Digital Library

[3]

C. Anderson, Between creative and quantified audiences: Web metrics and changing patterns of newswork in local US newsrooms, Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism 12 (5) (2011) 550–566,.

[4]

L. Baruh, M. Popescu, Big data analytics and the limits of privacy self-management, New Media & Society 19 (4) (2017) 579–596,.

[5]

L. Baruh, E. Secinti, Z. Cemalcilar, Online privacy concerns and privacy management: A meta-analytical review, Journal of Communication 67 (1) (2017) 26–53,.

[6]

T.H. Baek, M. Morimoto, Stay away From me. Examining the determinants of consumer avoidance of personalized advertising, Journal of Advertising 41 (1) (2012) 59–76,.

[7]

J. Boehmer, R. Larose, N. Rifon, S. Alhabash, S. Cotten, Determinants of online safety behaviour: Towards an intervention strategy for college students, Behaviour & Information Technology 34 (10) (2015) 1022–1035,.

Digital Library

[8]

S. Boerman, S.F. Kruikemeier, F.J.Z. Borgesius, Exploring motivations for online privacy protection behavior: Insights from panel data, Communication Research (2018),.

[9]

N. Bol, T. Dienlin, S. Kruikemeier, M. Sax, S.C. Boerman, J. Strycharz, et al., Understanding the effects of personalization as a privacy calculus: Analyzing self-disclosure across health, news, and commerce contexts, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 23 (6) (2018) 370–388,.

[10]

L. Brandimarte, A. Acquisti, G. Loewenstein, Misplaced confidences: Privacy and the control paradox, Social Psychological and Personality Science 4 (3) (2013) 340–347,.

[11]

H. Breitsohl, Beyond ANOVA: An introduction to structural equation models for experimental designs, Organizational Research Methods 22 (3) (2019) 649–677,.

[12]

S. Chai, S. Bagchi-Sen, C. Morrell, H.R. Rao, S.J. Upadhyaya, Internet and online information privacy: An exploratory study of preteens and early teens, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications 52 (2) (2009) 167–182,.

[13]

L.F. Cranor, Can users control online behavioral advertising effectively?, IEEE Security and Privacy Magazine 10 (2) (2012) 93–96,.

Digital Library

[14]

M. Degeling, C. Utz, C. Lentzsch, H. Hosseini, F. Schaub, T. Holz, We value your privacy ... Now take some cookies: Measuring the GDPR's impact on web privacy, in: NDSS 2019, 2019,. San Diego.

[15]

L. Desimpelaere, L. Hudders, D. Van de Sompel, Knowledge as a strategy for privacy protection: How a privacy literacy training affects children's online disclosure behaviour, Computers in Human Behavior 110 (2020),.

[16]

T. Ermakova, B. Fabian, S. Kelkel, T. Wolff, R. Zarnekow, Antecedents of health information privacy concerns, Procedia - Procedia Computer Science 63 (2015) 376–383,.

[17]

S. Greengard, Weighing the impact of GDPR, Communications of the ACM 61 (11) (2018) 16–18.

[18]

E.T. Higgins, Beyond pleasure and pain, American Psychologist 52 (12) (1997) 1280–1300,.

[19]

T.D. Jorgensen, S. Pornprasertmanit, A.M. Schoemann, Y. Rosseel, semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling, 2018.

[20]

M.L. Katz, S. Heaner, P. Reiter, J. van Putten, L. Murray, L. McDougle, et al., Development of an educational video to improve patient knowledge and communication with their healthcare providers about colorectal cancer screening, American Journal of Health Education 40 (4) (2009) 220–228,.

[21]

R.B. Kline, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 4th ed., Guilford Press, 2015.

[22]

D. Lee, R. Larose, N. Rifon, Keeping our network safe: A model of online protection behaviour, Behaviour & Information Technology 27 (5) (2008) 445–454,.

Digital Library

[23]

H. Li, L. Yu, W. He, The impact of GDPR on global technology development, Journal of Global Information Technology Management 22 (1) (2019) 1–6,.

[24]

J.E. Maddux, R.W. Rogers, Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 19 (5) (1983) 469–479,.

[25]

C.S. Meppelink, J. Van Weert, C.J. Haven, E.G. Smit, The effectiveness of health animations in audiences with different health literacy levels: An experimental study the Effectiveness of Health Animations in Audiences with Different Health Literacy Levels: An Experimental Study, Journal of Medical Internet Research 17 (1) (2015),.

[26]

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

[27]

G.R. Milne, L.I. Labrecque, C. Cromer, Toward an understanding of the online consumer's risky behavior and protection practices, Journal of Consumer Affairs 43 (3) (2009) 449–473,.

[28]

S. Milne, P. Sheeran, S. Orbell, Prediction and intervention in health-related behavior: A meta-analytic review of protection motivation theory, Journal of Applied Social Psychology 30 (1) (2000) 106–143,.

[29]

M.T. Morman, The influence of fear appeals, message design, and masculinity on men's motivation to perform the testicular self-exam, Journal of Applied Communication Research 28 (2) (2000) 91–116,.

[30]

M. Mousavizadeh, D.J. Kim, A study of the effect of privacy assurance mechanisms on self-disclosure in social networking sites from the view of protection motivation theory, International Conference on Information Systems (2015) 1–20.

[31]

H. Nissenbaum, Privacy as contextual integrity. Washington law review, 2004.

[32]

G. Van Noort, P. Kerkhof, B.M. Fennis, The persuasiveness of online safety cues: The impact of prevention focus compatibility of Web content on consumers’ risk perceptions, attitudes, and intentions, Journal of Interactive Marketing 22 (4) (2008) 58–72,.

[33]

E. Pariser, The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you, Penguin, New York, NY, 2011.

Digital Library

[34]

Y.J. Park, Digital literacy and privacy behavior online, Communication Research 40 (2) (2011) 215–236,.

[35]

R Core Team, R: A language and environment for statistical computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2018.

[36]

R.W. Rogers, A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change, Journal of Psychology 91 (1975) 93–114,.

[37]

Y. Rosseel, lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling, Journal of Statistical Software 48 (2) (2012) 1–36.

[38]

J. Sengupta, G.V. Johar, Effects of inconsistent attribute information on the predictive value of product attitudes: Toward a resolution of opposing perspectives, Journal of Consumer Research 29 (1) (2002) 39–56,.

[39]

J. Shah, E.T. Higgins, R.S. Friedman, Performance incentives and means: How regulatory focus influences goal attainment, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74 (2) (1998) 285–293,.

[40]

J. Shih-Chieh Hsu, S.-P. Shih, When does one weight threats more? An integration of regulatory focus theory and protection motivation theory, in: Proceedings of the 10th pre-ICIS workshop on information security and privacy, 2015, pp. 12–13.

[41]

E.G. Smit, G. Van Noort, H.A.M. Voorveld, Understanding online behavioural advertising: User knowledge, privacy concerns and online coping behaviour in Europe, Computers in Human Behavior 32 (2014) 15–22,.

[42]

S.Y. Soh, Privacy nudges: An alternative regulatory mechanism to ‘informed consent’ for online data protection behaviour, European Data Protection Law Review 5 (1) (2019) 65–74,.

[43]

J. Strycharz, G. van Noort, E. Smit, N. Helberger, Consumer view on personalized advertising: Overview of self-reported benefits and concerns, in: Advances in advertising research X, Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, 2019, pp. 53–66,.

[44]

J. Strycharz, G. Van Noort, E. Smit, N. Helberger, Protective behavior against personalized ads: Motivation to turn personalization off, Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace 13 (2) (2019),.

[45]

J. Strycharz, G. van Noort, E. Smit, R. Vliegenthart, N. Helberger, Media effects on public opinion about online privacy, in: IC2S2, 2017, (Cologne, Germany).

[46]

C. Tankard, What the GDPR means for businesses, Network Security (2016) 5–8,.

[47]

T.P. Tran, Personalized ads on Facebook: An effective marketing tool for online marketers, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 39 (2017) 230–242,.

[48]

B. Ur, P.G. Leon, L.F. Cranor, R. Shay, Y. Wang, Smart, useful, scary, creepy, in: Proceedings of the eighth symposium on useable privacy and security - SOUPS ’12, ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 2012, p. 1,.

Digital Library

[49]

H. Wickham, Ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis, Springer-Verlag, 2016.

Digital Library

[50]

H. Wickham, Tidyverse: Easily install and load ‘tidyverse’ packages, 2017, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=tidyverse.

[51]

V.M. Wottrich, E.A. van Reijmersdal, E.G. Smit, App users unwittingly in the spotlight: A model of privacy protection in mobile apps, Journal of Consumer Affairs (2018),.

[52]

H. Xiao, S. Li, X. Chen, B. Yu, M. Gao, H. Yan, et al., Protection motivation theory in predicting intention to engage in protective behaviors against schistosomiasis among middle school students in rural China, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 8 (10) (2014),.

[53]

H. Xu, T. Dinev, H.J. Smith, P. Hart, Examining the formation of individual’ s privacy concerns: Toward an integrative view, in: ICIS 2008, 2008, (Paris).

[54]

H. Xu, S. Gupta, M.B. Rosson, J.M. Carroll, Measuring mobile users' concerns for information privacy, in: Thirty third international conference on information systems, 2012, (Orlando).

[55]

L. Zhou, Z. Yang, M.K. Hui, Non-local or local brands? A multi-level investigation into confidence in brand origin identification and its strategic implications, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 38 (2) (2010) 202–218,.

Cited By

Li J(2025)What If We Don't Accept the Cookies?Interactions10.1145/370265532:1(19-21)Online publication date: 7-Jan-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3702655
Alhirabi NBeaumont SRana OPerera C(2024)Designing Privacy-Aware IoT Applications for Unregulated DomainsACM Transactions on Internet of Things10.1145/36484805:2(1-32)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3648480
Kyi LMhaidli ASantos CRoesner FBiega A(2024)“It doesn’t tell me anything about how my data is used”: User Perceptions of Data Collection PurposesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642260(1-12)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642260
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

No to cookies: Empowering impact of technical and legal knowledge on rejecting tracking cookies

Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

Recommendations

The moral value of informational privacy in cyberspace

Solutions to the problem of protecting informational privacy in cyberspace tend to fall into one of three categories: technological solutions, self-regulatory solutions, and legislative solutions. In this paper, I suggest that the legal protection of the ...
An analytical framework for online privacy research

An analytical framework is suggested for interdisciplinary online privacy research.Websites managers views and knowledge is a neglected topic in privacy research.Websites managers indicate that their own websites do not violate users privacy.The younger ...
Privacy vs convenience: Understanding intention-behavior divergence post-GDPR
Abstract
The privacy paradox describes a scenario in which individuals express privacy concerns but still share private data online. We explore how the paradox can be understood following the introduction of the European Union's landmark GDPR (General ...
Highlights
- Self-management of privacy does not lead to enactment of user privacy rights.
- Convenience and perceived value shape user privacy attitudes.
- GDPR increases privacy awareness, yet users perceive limited control over their data.
- ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Computers in Human Behavior

Computers in Human Behavior Volume 120, Issue C

Jul 2021

358 pages

ISSN:0747-5632

Issue’s Table of Contents

The Authors.

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2021

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

10
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 29 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Li J(2025)What If We Don't Accept the Cookies?Interactions10.1145/370265532:1(19-21)Online publication date: 7-Jan-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3702655
Alhirabi NBeaumont SRana OPerera C(2024)Designing Privacy-Aware IoT Applications for Unregulated DomainsACM Transactions on Internet of Things10.1145/36484805:2(1-32)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3648480
Kyi LMhaidli ASantos CRoesner FBiega A(2024)“It doesn’t tell me anything about how my data is used”: User Perceptions of Data Collection PurposesProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642260(1-12)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613904.3642260
Stubenvoll MBinder A(2024)Is knowledge power? Testing whether knowledge affects chilling effects and privacy-protective behaviors using browser historiesComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2023.107949150:COnline publication date: 1-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107949
Bongard-Blanchy KSterckx JRossi ASergeeva AKoenig VRivas SDistler V(2023)Analysing the Influence of Loss-Gain Framing on Data Disclosure Behaviour: A Study on the Use Case of App Permission RequestsProceedings of the 2023 European Symposium on Usable Security10.1145/3617072.3617108(112-125)Online publication date: 16-Oct-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3617072.3617108
Ogbanufe O(2023)Securing online accounts and assetsInternational Journal of Information Management: The Journal for Information Professionals10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.10259068:COnline publication date: 1-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102590
Vrhovec SBernik IMarkelj B(2023)Explaining information seeking intentionsComputers and Security10.1016/j.cose.2022.103038125:COnline publication date: 1-Feb-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.cose.2022.103038
Orr MMacLeod LBagnell AMcGrath PWozney LMeier S(2023)The comfort of adolescent patients and their parents with mobile sensing and digital phenotypingComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2022.107603140:COnline publication date: 1-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107603
Giese JStabauer M(2022)Factors that Influence Cookie AcceptanceHCI in Business, Government and Organizations10.1007/978-3-031-05544-7_21(272-285)Online publication date: 26-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-05544-7_21
Santos CRossi ASanchez Chamorro LBongard-Blanchy KAbu-Salma RKim YKim JLivraga GPark N(2021)Cookie Banners, What's the Purpose?Proceedings of the 20th Workshop on Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society10.1145/3463676.3485611(187-194)Online publication date: 15-Nov-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3463676.3485611

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents