Andrew Boyd, Kaven Williams, Ron Chin, Scott Densten, Diana Diamond, Chris Morgenthaler 1

 Privacy, Security and Compliance  Current State of Research  IUIPC Model  Study Design  Initial Results  Implications of Findings  Future Directions for Research  Questions 2

 This topic sits at the intersection of: ◦ Psychology ◦ Management Theory and Corporate Governance ◦ Economic Social Utility, Social Contract and Social Network Theory ◦ Computer Science  It has an impact on: ◦ Civil and Criminal Statutes ◦ Economic Behaviour ◦ Civil Rights and Freedoms ◦ Systems Architecture and Development ◦ The interplay between ‘Personal’ and ‘Public’ space 3

 Various historical models for online privacy attitudes  Many theoretical models- a dearth of empirical studies  Main empirical construct is IUIPC  Internet User Information privacy Concern  IUIPC draws upon Social Contract theory ◦ Presents a theoretical framework based on attitudes and interdependencies towards:  Collection  Control  Awareness of personal information ◦ These dimensions also form some of the principles behind many privacy statutes in North America and Europe. 4

 Great for attitudes, not so good for demographics  May be biased towards overstating privacy concerns  Clearly highlights gap between attitudes and behaviours  Our research team extended IUIPC to include a wider range of demographic co-variants (as a precursor to establishing new models for attitudes and behaviours) 5

6

 IUIPC- Internet User’s Information Privacy Concerns  Multi-dimensional attitudinal survey scaled on a Seven Point Likert Scale  Mixed in with behavioural questions about social media membership and usage  Distributed via Pace , and personal networks of team members  Ran March 1- April 30, 2009  481 respondents, 390 completed 7

8 NumberHypothesisPreliminary Finding H1 Social media privacy attitudes vary by age. Supported H2 Social media privacy attitudes vary by education. Supported H3 Social media privacy attitudes vary by internet experience. Not Supported H4 Social media privacy attitudes vary by ethnicity. Supported H5 Social media privacy attitudes vary by gender. Supported H6 Social media privacy attitudes vary by individual’s sense of victimization. Supported H7 Social media privacy attitudes vary by importance of a large group of friends. Not Supported H8 Social media privacy attitudes vary by media exposure to social media risks. Not Supported H9 Social media privacy attitudes vary by online context. Not Supported

 Leveling of privacy attitudes across age groups  Ambiguities towards trust of social networking sites  Knowledge, experience and comfort lead to increased disclosure  Context Matters- Online Normative Behaviour 9

 Examine forces behind leveling of privacy concerns across age groups  Define ambiguities in trust attitudes towards social networking sites  Discover why ‘familiarity breeds nonchalance’  Establish the role of context (normative behaviour) in online attitudes and behaviours 10

? 11