Knowledge as an effective tool to protect ICT users’ privacy : The layered informed consent as ‘opt-in’ model

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31921/doxacom.n22a7

Keywords:

Privacy, new technologies, Social Network Sites, informed consent, ethics

Abstract

The present study contributes to the research on communication processes and privacy issues in Social Networks Sites (SNS) and the specific implications for individuals’ informational self-determination in these types of technical environments. The central aim of this project is to investigate whether users are in a position to achieve their desired privacy level with the technical tools and information provided by these online social spaces, to delineate the potentially dangerous context for their privacy and to design an efficient way of introducing new European Commission’s regulation on informed consent in those scenarios. For this purpose, we use an ethnographic approach in conjunction with technical modelling tools. In a first phase of study, we tested competences and knowledge of a group of users of SNS, especially focusing on their attitudes towards privacy and their own protection strategies. The initial empirical findings of this phase suggest that despite their privacy concerns, users tend to show risky practices when introducing their private information on the Net. To assess if this fact is due to information shortage and coevaluate the importance a correct flow of information has to prevent privacy breaches, in the second phase we will provide participants with an informed consent tool.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Global Statistics ℹ️

Cumulative totals since publication
583
Views
198
Downloads
781
Total

Author Biography

  • Amaya Noain Sánchez, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Periodista y Doctora Cum Laude con Mención Europea por la Universidad Complutense de Madrid- Goethe-Universitát Frankfurt am Main, Master en Comunicación Radiofónica UCM-RNE y Master Oficial en Aspectos teóricos y Estructurales de la Comunicación de Masas por la misma universidad. Ha colaborado en numerosos estudios sobre nuevas tecnologías y privacidad desarrollados entre el Institut für Kulturanthropologie und Europáische Ethnologie de la Goethe-Universitát Frankfurt am Main, donde es investigadora invitada y el Fraunhofer-Institut für Sichere Infor- mationstechnologie SIT de Darmstadt. Igualmente, ha sido galardonada con el Premio Protección de Datos Personales de Investigación 2015, que otorga anualmente la Agencia Española de Protección de Datos.

References

Barnes, S. B. (2006): “A privacy paradox: social networking in the United States”, First Monday, vol. 11, n. 9. Disponible en: http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1394/1312 [Consultado el: 15/05/2013].

Boyd, D. y Hargittai, E. (2010): “Facebook privacy settings: who cares?”, First Monday, vol. 15, n. 8. Disponible en: http://firs- tmonday.org/article/view/3086/2589 [Consultado el: 05/06/2013].

Buchmann, J. (ed.) (2013): Internet Privacy: Taking opportunities, assesing risk, building trust. (Acatech - Deutsche Akade mie der Technikwissenschaften, acatech STUDY), Heidelberg e tal.: SpringerVerlag.

Capurro, R. (2005): “Privacy. An intercultural perspective”, Ethics and Information Technology, vol. 7, n. 1, pp. 37- 47.

Gross, R. y Acquisiti, A. (2005): “Information revelation and privacy in online social networks”, Proceedings of ACM Worlcs- hop on Privacy in the Electronic Society’05. Nueva York: ACM Press, pp. 71-80.

Hull, G.; Lipford, H.R. y Llatulipe, C. (2010): “Contextual gaps: privacy issues on Facebook”, Ethics and Information Technology, vol. 13, n. 4, pp. 289-302.

Ilyes, P. y Ochs, C. (2013): “Sociotechnical Privacy. Mapping the Research landscape”, Tecnoscienza, Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies, vol. 2, n. 4, pp. 79-91.

Ilyes, P.; Andreas, P. y Kramm, A. (2013): “Designing privacy-aware online social networks - A reflective socio-technical approach” CSCW ’ 13 Measuring Networked Social Privacy Workshop, February 23-27, 2013, San Antonio, Texas, United States. Disponible en: http://testlab.sit.fraunhofer.de/downloads/Publications/poller_osn_design_cscwl3_workshop_ca- mera_ready_rot.pdf [Consultado el: 25/05/2013].

Kramm A. (2011): “The field site as a tool: mixed methods in social network studies”, Gradúate Journal of Social Science, vol. 8, n. 3, pp. 127-141.

Lampe, C.; Ellison, N. B. y Steinfield, C. (2008): “Changes in use and perception of Facebook”, Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW'08). San Diego: ACM Press, pp. 721-730.

Madden, M. y Smith, A. (2010): “Reputation management and social media”, Pew Internet 8¿ American Life Project, Washington. Disponible en: http://www.pewinternet.Org/files/oldmedia//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Reputation_ Management.pdf [Consultado el: 15/04/2013].

Nissenbaum, H. (2010): Privacy in context: technology; policy, and the integrity of social life} Stanford: Stanford Law Books.

- (2004): Privacy as contextual integrity” Washington Law Review, vol. 79 n. 1, pp. 101-139.

- (1998): “Protecting privacy in an Information Age: The problem of privacy in public”, Law and Philosophy vol. 17, n. 5- 6, pp. 559-596.

Palen, L. y Dourish, P. (2003): “Unpacking “privacy” for a networked world”, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’03). New York: ACM Press, pp. 129-136.

Wang, Y. et al. (2011): “I regretted the minute I pressed share’: A qualitative study of regrets on Facebook”, Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS '1 i, New York, n. 10, pp. 1-16.

Young, A.L. y Quan-Hasse, A. (2013): “Privacy protection strategies on Facebook”, Information, Communication and Society, n. 16, vol. 4, pp. 479-500.

Downloads

Published

25-05-2016

Issue

Section

Miscellaneous of Research articles and essays

How to Cite

Noain Sánchez, A. (2016). Knowledge as an effective tool to protect ICT users’ privacy : The layered informed consent as ‘opt-in’ model. Doxa Comunicación. Interdisciplinary Journal of Communication Studies and Social Sciences, 22, 149-155. https://doi.org/10.31921/doxacom.n22a7
PlumX Metrics