arXiv preprint ·
The Privacy Paradox Is a Misnomer: Data Under Structural Uncertainty
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
The infamous privacy paradox refers to the apparent inconsistency between people's stated concern for privacy and their readiness to disclose personal information. This phenomenon has sparked two largely disconnected literatures: one offering experimental evidence of inconsistent behavior, and another providing qualitative accounts and defending the importance of privacy. The Article presents an online field experiment that bridges those literatures and shows that the so-called paradox arises from a mischaracterization of the underlying behavior. The Article finds that it is structural uncertainty about risk that drives seemingly paradoxical privacy decisions. It does so by isolating discounting mechanisms and empirically testing whether observed privacy choices reflect temptation or rational responses to uncertainty. The results suggest that privacy behavior is not paradoxical but, rather, consistent with choices shaped by incomplete information. The Article then discusses the policy implications of this reframing. As privacy decisions stem from structural uncertainty, which operates as a market failure, regulation should aim to reduce that uncertainty. This supports regulation that prioritizes transparency (for people to assess the risks of data collection) and flexibility mechanisms that accommodate evolving contexts. Such reframing provides a new argument for the right to be forgotten, which allows people to revisit prior disclosures as new risks become apparent. By shifting the focus from individual inconsistency to structural uncertainty, the findings call for privacy law to better reflect the reality of people's decision-making environments.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computers & Society
From Canon to Nikon: Camera Domain Shift and Potential Equity Implications in Retinal AI
AI-Native Academia Should Build a Community Verification Layer
Two for One: Privileged Learning for Resource-Constrained Screening
DLT Terms 100: a learner's glossary based on ISO 22739:2024
Situating Vulnerability: An Ethical Governance Framework for Anthropomorphic AI Interaction
Get the few papers worth your time in Computers & Society every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.