Enhancing User Privacy Through Ephemeral Sharing Design: Experimental Evidence from Online Dating

References

• Acemoglu D, Makhdoumi A, Malekian A, Ozdaglar A (2022) Too much data: Prices and inefficiencies in data markets. Amer. Econom. J.: Microeconom. 14(4):218–256.Google Scholar
• Acquisti A, Brandimarte L, Hancock J (2022) How privacy’s past may shape its future. Science 375(6578):270–272.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acquisti A, Brandimarte L, Loewenstein G (2015) Privacy and human behavior in the age of information. Science 347(6221):509–514.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acquisti A, Brandimarte L, Loewenstein G (2020) Secrets and likes: The drive for privacy and the difficulty of achieving it in the digital age. J. Consumer Psych. 30(4):736–758.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acquisti A, Taylor C, Wagman L (2016) The economics of privacy. J. Econom. Literature 54(2):442–492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adjerid I, Acquisti A, Loewenstein G (2019) Choice architecture, framing, and cascaded privacy choices. Management Sci. 65(5):2267–2290.Abstract, Google Scholar
• Adjerid I, Peer E, Acquisti A (2018) Beyond the privacy paradox: Objective vs. relative risk in privacy decision making. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 42(2):465–488.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Adjerid I, Acquisti A, Telang R, Padman R, Adler-Milstein J (2016) The impact of privacy regulation and technology incentives: The case of health information exchanges. Management Sci. 62(4):1042–1063.Link, Google Scholar
• Altman I (1976) Privacy: A conceptual analysis. Environ. Behav. 8(1):7–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aridor G, Che YK, Salz T (2020) The economic consequences of data privacy regulation: Empirical evidence from GDPR. Preprint, submitted January 29, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3522845.Google Scholar
• Athey S, Catalini C, Tucker C (2018) The digital privacy paradox: Small money, small costs, small talk. Preprint, submitted February 15, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2916489.Google Scholar
• Bapna R, Ramaprasad J, Shmueli G, Umyarov A (2016) One-way mirrors in online dating: A randomized field experiment. Management Sci. 62(11):3100–3122.Link, Google Scholar
• Bayer JB, Triệu P, Ellison NB (2020) Social media elements, ecologies, and effects. Annual Rev. Psych. 71:471–497.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bayer JB, Ellison NB, Schoenebeck SY, Falk EB (2016) Sharing the small moments: Ephemeral social interaction on Snapchat. Inform. Comm. Soc. 19(7):956–977.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger CR, Calabrese RJ (1974) Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Comm. Res. 1(2):99–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bergemann D, Bonatti A (2019) Markets for information: An introduction. Annu. Rev. Econom. 11:85–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bojd B, Yoganarasimhan H (2022) Star-cursed lovers: Role of popularity information in online dating. Marketing Sci. 41(1):73–92.Link, Google Scholar
• Borisov N, Goldberg I (eds.) (2008) Privacy enhancing technologies. Proc. 8th Internat. Sympos. on Privacy Enhancing Tech. (Springer, Berlin), 5134.Google Scholar
• Bruch EE, Newman MEJ (2018) Aspirational pursuit of mates in online dating markets. Sci. Adv. 4(8):eaap9815.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burkert H (1997) Privacy-enhancing technologies: Typology, critique, vision. Technology and Privacy: The New Landscape (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), 125–142.Google Scholar
• Burtch G, Ghose A, Wattal S (2015) The hidden cost of accommodating crowd-funder privacy preferences: A randomized field experiment. Management Sci. 61(5):949–962.Link, Google Scholar
• Cacioppo JT, Cacioppo S, Gonzaga GC, Ogburn EL, VanderWeele TJ (2013) Marital satisfaction and break-ups differ across on-line and off-line meeting venues. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110(25):10135–10140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen A (2021) The Cold Start Problem: How to Start and Scale Network Effects (HarperCollins, New York).Google Scholar
• Choi TR, Sung Y (2018) Instagram vs. Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern on social media. Telemation Inform. 35(8):2289–2298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi S, Williams D, Kim H (2020) A snap of your true self: How self-presentation and temporal affordance influence self-concept on social media. New Media Soc. 1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cobb C, Kohno T (2017) How public is my private life? Privacy in online dating. Proc. 26th Internat. Conf. on World Wide Web, 1231–1240.Google Scholar
• Collis A, Moehring A, Sen A, Acquisti A (2021) Information frictions and heterogeneity in valuations of personal data. Preprint, submitted December 2, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3974826.Google Scholar
• Elvy SA (2017) Paying for privacy and the personal data economy. Columbia Law Rev. 117(6):1369.Google Scholar
• Finkel EJ, Eastwick PW, Karney BR, Reis HT, Sprecher S (2012) Online dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psych. Sci. Public Interest 13(1):3–66.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiore AT, Taylor LS, Zhong X, Mendelsohn GA, Cheshire C (2010) Who’s right and who writes: People, profiles, contacts, and replies in online dating. Proc. 43rd Hawaii Internat. Conf. on System Sci. (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 1–10.Google Scholar
• Fong J (2020) Effects of market size and competition in two-sided markets: Evidence from online dating. Preprint, submitted June 29, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3458373.Google Scholar
• Ghose A, Li B, Liu S (2019) Mobile targeting using customer trajectory patterns. Management Sci. 65(11):5027–5049.Link, Google Scholar
• Goldberg I (2007) Privacy-enhancing technologies for the Internet, III: Ten years later. Acquisti A, Gritzalis S, Lambrinoudakis C, di Vimercati S, eds. Digital Privacy: Theory, Technologies, and Practices (CRC Press, New York), 25–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gregory RW, Henfridsson O, Kaganer E, Kyriakou SH (2021) The role of artificial intelligence and data network effects for creating user value. Acad. Management Rev. 46(3):534–551.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haber B (2019) The digital ephemeral turn: Queer theory, privacy, and the temporality of risk. Media, Culture & Society 41(8):1069–1087.Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M (2022) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 3rd ed. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Hall JA, Park N, Song H, Cody MJ (2010) Strategic misrepresentation in online dating: The effects of gender, self-monitoring, and personality traits. J. Soc. Personality Relations 27(1):117–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hallam L, Walrave W, De Backer CJ (2018) Information disclosure, trust and health risks in online dating. Walrave W, Van Ouytsel J, Ponnet K, Temple JR, eds. Sexting: Motives and Risk in Online Sexual Self-Presentation (Palgrave, Nottingham, UK), 19–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hayes AF (2017) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach (Guilford Publications, New York).Google Scholar
• Heurix J, Zimmermann P, Neubauer T, Fenz S (2015) A taxonomy for privacy enhancing technologies. Comput. Security 53:1–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hitsch GJ, Hortaçsu A, Ariely D (2010a) Matching and sorting in online dating. Amer. Econom. Rev. 100(1):130–163.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hitsch GJ, Hortaçsu A, Ariely D (2010b) What makes you click? Mate preferences in online dating. Quant. Marketing Econom. 8(4):393–427.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hofstetter R, Rüppell R, John LK (2017) Temporary sharing prompts unrestrained disclosures that leave lasting negative impressions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(45):11902–11907.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang N, Burtch G, He Y, Hong Y (2022) Managing congestion in a matching market via demand information disclosure. Inform. Systems Res. 33(4):1119–1516.Link, Google Scholar
• Hui KL, Teo HH, Lee SYT (2007) The value of privacy assurance: An exploratory field experiment. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 31(1):19–33.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ichihashi S (2021) The economics of data externalities. J. Econom. Theory 196:105316.Google Scholar
• Jia T, Spivey RF, Szymanski B, Korniss G (2015) An analysis of the matching hypothesis in networks. PLoS One 10(6):e0129804.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Heng CS, Choi BC (2013) Research note—Privacy concerns and privacy-protective behavior in synchronous online social interactions. Inform. Systems Res. 24(3):579–595.Link, Google Scholar
• John LK, Barasz K, Norton MI (2016) Hiding personal information reveals the worst. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113(4):954–959.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Joinson A (1998) Causes and implications of disinhibited behavior on the Internet. Gackenbach J, ed. Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, Inter-personal, and Transpersonal Implications (Academic Press, San Diego), 43–60.Google Scholar
• Jung J, Bapna R, Ramaprasad J, Umyarov A (2019) Love unshackled: Identifying the effect of mobile app adoption in online dating. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 43:47–72.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jung J, Lim H, Lee D, Kim C (2022) The secret to finding a match: A field experiment on choice capacity design in an online dating platform. Inform. Systems Res. 33(4):1248–1263.Link, Google Scholar
• Keith MJ, Maynes C, Lowry PB, Babb J (2014) Privacy fatigue: The effect of privacy control complexity on consumer electronic information disclosure. Proc. Internat. Conf. on Inform. Systems, 14–17.Google Scholar
• Kummer M, Schulte P (2019) When private information settles the bill: Money and privacy in Google’s market for smartphone applications. Management Sci. 65(8):3470–3494.Link, Google Scholar
• Lien CH, Cao Y, Zhou X (2017) Service quality, satisfaction, stickiness, and usage intentions: An exploratory evaluation in the context of WeChat services. Comput. Human Behav. 68:403–410.Google Scholar
• Lin T (2022) Valuing intrinsic and instrumental preferences for privacy. Marketing Sci. 41(4):235–253.Link, Google Scholar
• Lowry PB, Cao J, Everard A (2011) Privacy concerns vs. desire for interpersonal awareness in driving the use of self-disclosure technologies: The case of instant messaging in two cultures. J. Management Inform. Systems 27(4):163–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu Y, Tan B, Hui KL (2004) Inducing customers to disclose personal information to Internet businesses with social adjustment benefits. Proc. 24th Internat. Conf. on Inform. Systems (ACM, New York).Google Scholar
• Lutz C, Ranzini G (2017) Where dating meets data: Investigating social and institutional privacy concerns on Tinder. Soc. Media Soc. 3(1):1–12.Google Scholar
• Mehta S, Dawande M, Janakiraman G, Mookerjee V (2021) How to sell a data set? Pricing policies for data monetization. Inform. Systems Res. 32(4):1281–1297.Google Scholar
• Obada-Obieh B, Somayaji A (2017) Can I believe you? Establishing trust in computer mediated introductions. Proc. New Security Paradigms Workshop, 94–106.Google Scholar
• Peer E, Acquisti A (2016) The impact of reversibility on the decision to disclose personal information. J. Consumer Marketing 33(6):428–436.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petronio S (1991) Communication boundary management: A theoretical model of managing disclosure of private information between marital couples. Comm. Theory 1(4):311–335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petronio S (2002) Boundaries of Privacy (State University of New York Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Phua J, Jin SV, Kim JJ (2017) Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging and bonding social capital: A comparison of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat. Comput. Human Behav. 72:115–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Piwek L, Joinson A (2016) “What do they Snapchat about?” Patterns of use in time-limited instant messaging service. Comput. Human Behav. 54(1):358–367.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Poltash NA (2012) Snapchat and sexting: A snapshot of baring your bare essentials. Richmond J. Law & Tech. 19:1.Google Scholar
• Rifon NJ, LaRose R, Choi SM (2005) Your privacy is sealed: Effects of web privacy seals on trust and personal disclosures. J. Consumer Affairs 39(2):339–362.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld MJ (2017) Marriage, choice, and couplehood in the age of the Internet. Sociol. Sci. 4(9):490–510.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenfeld MJ, Thomas RJ, Hausen S (2019) Disintermediating your friends: How online dating in the United States displaces other ways of meeting. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116(36):17753–17758.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roth AE (2015) Who Gets What and Why: The New Economics of Matchmaking and Market Design (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston).Google Scholar
• Samat S, Acquisti A (2017) Format vs. content: the impact of risk and presentation on disclosure decisions. Thirteenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2017) (ACM, New York), 377–384.Google Scholar
• Saunders JF, Eaton AA (2018) Snaps, selfies, and shares: How three popular social media platforms contribute to the sociocultural model of disordered eating among young women. Cyberpsych. Behav. Soc. Networks 21(6):343–354.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sedgewick JR, Flath ME, Elias LJ (2017) Presenting your best self (ie): The influence of gender on vertical orientation of selfies on Tinder. Frontiers Psych. 8:604.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shi L, Huang P (2019) Pragmatic men, romantic women? Performance feedback design on two-sided matching platforms. Proc. 40th Internat. Conf. on Inform. Systems (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta).Google Scholar
• Shi L, Viswanathan S (2023) Optional verification and signaling in online matching markets: Evidence from a randomized field experiment. Inform. Systems Res. 34(4):1321–1814.Google Scholar
• Statista (2020) Online dating worldwide. Retrieved February 28, 2024, https://www.statista.com/outlook/372/100/online-dating/worldwide.Google Scholar
• Steed R, Liu T, Wu ZS, Acquisti A (2022) Policy impacts of statistical uncertainty and privacy. Science 377(6609):928–931.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Suler J (2004) The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsych. Behav. 7(3):321–326.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tavani HT, Moor JH (2001) Privacy protection, control of information, and privacy-enhancing technologies. ACM Sigcas Computers Soc. 31(1):6–11.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor LS, Fiore AT, Mendelsohn GA, Cheshire C (2011) “Out of my league”: A real-world test of the matching hypothesis. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 37(7):942–954.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teutsch D, Masur PK, Trepte S (2018) Privacy in mediated and non-mediated interpersonal communication: How subjective concepts and situational perceptions influence behaviors. Soc. Media Soc. 4(2):2056305118767134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tsai JY, Egelman S, Cranor L, Acquisti A (2011) The effect of online privacy information on purchasing behavior: An experimental study. Inform. Systems Res. 22(2):254–268.Link, Google Scholar
• Tucker CE (2014) Social networks, personalized advertising, and privacy controls. J. Marketing Res. 51(5):546–562.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Utz S, Muscanell N, Khalid C (2015) Snapchat elicits more jealousy than Facebook: A comparison of Snapchat and Facebook use. Cyberpsych. Behav. Soc. Networks 18(3):141–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vaterlaus JM, Barnett K, Roche C, Young JA (2016) “Snapchat is more personal”: An exploratory study on Snapchat behaviors and young adult interpersonal relationships. Comput. Human Behav. 62:594–601.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Waddell TF (2016) The allure of privacy or the desire for self-expression? Identifying users’ gratifications for ephemeral, photograph-based communication. Cyberpsych. Behav. Soc. Networks 19(7):441–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wakefield LT, Wakefield RL (2018) Anxiety and ephemeral social media use in negative eWOM creation. J. Interactive Marketing 41:44–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Norcie G, Komanduri S, Acquisti A, Leon PG, Cranor LF (2011) “I regretted the minute I pressed share” a qualitative study of regrets on Facebook. Proc. 7th Sympos. on Usable Privacy and Security (Association for Computing Machinery, New York), 1–16.Google Scholar
• Whyte S, Chan HF, Torgler B (2018) Do men and women know what they want? Sex differences in online daters’ educational preferences. Psych. Sci. 29(8):1370–1375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xu L, Xiang J, Yuan X (2018) Transferring rich deep features for facial beauty prediction. Preprint, submitted March 20, https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.07253.Google Scholar
• Xu B, Chang P, Welker CL, Bazarova NN, Cosley D (2016) Automatic archiving vs. default deletion: What snapchat tells us about ephemerality in design. Proc. ACM Conf. Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Comput. (ACM, New York), 1662–1675.Google Scholar
• Yu M, Riddle K (2022) An experimental test of the effects of digital content permanency on perceived anonymity and indirect effects on cyber bullying intentions. Soc. Media Soc. 8(1):20563051221087255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yu Y, Animesh A, Ramaprasad J, Pinsonneault A (2018) Does premium subscription pay off? Evidence from online dating platform. Proc. 39th Internat. Conf. on Inform. Systems.Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Li B, Luo X, Wang X (2019) Personalized mobile targeting with user engagement stages: Combining a structural hidden markov model and field experiment. Inform. Systems Res. 30(3):787–804.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang NA, Wang CA, Karahanna E, Xu Y (2022a) Peer privacy concerns: Conceptualization and measurement. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 46(1):491–530.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Ran X, Luo C, Gao Y, Zhao Y, Shuai Q (2022b) “Only visible for three days”: Mining microblogs to understand reasons for using the Time Limit setting on WeChat Moments. Comput. Human Behav. 134:107316.Crossref, Google Scholar