View
218
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
1/83
https://twitter.com/harris_mkt
http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/harris-imran/44/1b4/bb0/
harris_mkt@hotmail.co.uk
https://twitter.com/harris_mkthttp://uk.linkedin.com/pub/harris-imran/44/1b4/bb0/http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/harris-imran/44/1b4/bb0/mailto:harris_mkt@hotmail.co.ukmailto:harris_mkt@hotmail.co.ukmailto:harris_mkt@hotmail.co.ukhttp://uk.linkedin.com/pub/harris-imran/44/1b4/bb0/https://twitter.com/harris_mkt8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
2/83
1
Acknowledgments
This dissertation could not have been completed without hard work, perseverance and
commitment to the study. In life, you learn to appreciate the people who provide you
with help and support when you need it most, but ultimately it is you who determines
the outcomes of success or failure you achieve in life.
Id like to show gratitude towards Grant Timms, my supervisor, for his support
throughout the course of the process. Id like to also thank the participants who took
part and helped me with the research process.
(Appendix one presents a personal reflection on the process)
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
3/83
2
Abstract
The revolution of the internet has provided both consumers and companies with
endless opportunities of potential; the ability to share and absorb mass amounts of
information at high speeds on a global scale has never been so easy (Winer, 2001).
The capacity to collect and share mass amounts of information with ease has been
identified by many marketers as potential to reach heights of consumer profiling that
have never been achieved before (Kotler and Zaltman, 1971). This however has
resulted in consumers losing confidence in entering transactional relationships online,
hampering many organisations ability to conduct business (Malhotra et al, 2004).
The purpose of this study was to understand what the implications are of consumer
privacy attitudes towards the disclosure of personal information online and what
firms online can do to reduce the consumer apprehensions of sharing personal data.
The process of the study began with a review of the relevant literature, establishing an
understanding of privacy and the relevant dimensions within the notion that affect
consumer concerns. It was identified from the social contract theory three key
constructs are associated with consumer concerns of disclosing data; collection,
control and awareness. Thusly, the research encompassed Malhotra et als (2004)
Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns model (IUIPC), measuring consumer
attitudes towards the collection of data, control for shared data and being made
aware of the collection of personal data.
The research findings did in fact reflect respondents held general concerns for privacy
online, especially in the case of unknown entities collecting data. The majority of the
respondents were very concerned of personal data being compromised, especially so
for financial items of information. Strong attitudes were identified towards the
awareness, collection and control of personal data.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
4/83
3
Contents
1.0 Background ................................................................................................................. 8
1.1 Importance of the Study .................................................................................... 9
1.2 Research Question .................................................................................................. 9
1.3 Limitations .............................................................................................................. 9
1.3.1 Sample ............................................................................................................. 9
2.0 Literature Review ...................................................................................................... 10
2.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 10
2.2 The States, Dimensions and Functions of Privacy ................................................ 10
2.2.1 Information Privacy........................................................................................ 12
2.3 Consumer Privacy ................................................................................................. 12
2.3.1 Consumer Privacy Concerns .......................................................................... 13
2.4 The Collection of Consumer Data Online ............................................................. 14
2.4.1 The Implications of Online Data Collection ................................................... 14
2.5 Theoretical Frameworks of Individual Attitudes and Behaviours towards Online
Information Privacy..................................................................................................... 16
2.5.1 Theory of Reasoned Action & the Theory of Reasoned Behaviour ............... 16
2.5.2 Social Contract Theory ................................................................................... 17
2.5.3 Privacy Calculus .............................................................................................. 19
2.6 Measuring Consumer Privacy Concerns (CFIP & IUIPC Models) .......................... 19
2.7 Organisational Factors of Theoretical Privacy Concerns ...................................... 20
2.7.1 Procedural Fairness Theory ........................................................................... 20
2.7.2 Social Presence Theory .................................................................................. 21
2.7.3 Social Response Theory ................................................................................. 21
2.8 Development of an Hypothesis ............................................................................ 22
2.8.1 Hypothesis ..................................................................................................... 22
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
5/83
4
3.0 Methodology ............................................................................................................. 23
3.1 Chapter Introduction ............................................................................................ 23
3.2 Research Purpose ................................................................................................. 23
3.3 Research Philosophies .......................................................................................... 23
3.4 Research Approach ............................................................................................... 25
3.5 Research Strategy ................................................................................................. 25
3.5.1 Questionnaire ................................................................................................ 27
3.5.2 Interviews ...................................................................................................... 28
3.6 Time Horizons ....................................................................................................... 29
3.7 Research Conduct ................................................................................................. 29
3.7.1 Sampling ......................................................................................................... 29
3.8 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................... 30
3.8.1 Data quality .................................................................................................... 30
3.8.2 Reliability........................................................................................................ 30
3.8.3 Validity ........................................................................................................... 31
3.9 Considerations ...................................................................................................... 31
3.9.1 Ethical considerations .................................................................................... 31
3.9.2 Budget Constraints ........................................................................................ 32
3.9.3 Sample Constraints ........................................................................................ 32
3.10 Chapter Summary ............................................................................................... 32
4.0 Results ....................................................................................................................... 33
4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 33
4.2 Questionnaire ....................................................................................................... 33
4.3 Summary of Respondents ..................................................................................... 34
4.3.1 Age & Gender ................................................................................................. 34
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
6/83
5
4.4 Exploratory Data Analysis of Internet Use, Online Privacy Concerns and
Experience ................................................................................................................... 35
4.4.1 Internet Usage ............................................................................................... 35
4.4.2 Experiences of Privacy Invasion ..................................................................... 36
4.4.3 General Concerns for Privacy Online ............................................................. 37
4.5 Central Tendency & Dispersion Measurement of Respondents Level of Privacy
Concerns Online .......................................................................................................... 38
4.5.1 Attitudes of General Privacy Concerns Online .............................................. 38
4.6 Cross Tabulation of General Privacy Concerns ..................................................... 40
4.6.1 Level of Concerns by Gender ......................................................................... 40
4.7 Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns Model: Measurement of Central
Tendency & Dispersion ............................................................................................... 42
4.8 Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns Model: Cross Tabulation by
General Concerns for Privacy ..................................................................................... 44
4.9 Semi-Structured Interviews .................................................................................. 46
4.9.1 Results ............................................................................................................ 47
4.10 Results Summary ................................................................................................ 48
5.0 Discussion ................................................................................................................. 49
5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 49
5.2 Outcomes .............................................................................................................. 50
5.2.1 Consumers Level of Concern for Privacy Scale ............................................. 50
5.2.2 Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns .............................................. 52
5.3 Summary ............................................................................................................... 53
6.0 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 54
6.1 Research Implications ........................................................................................... 54
6.2 Implications of the Practice .................................................................................. 55
6.3 Revisiting the Limitations ...................................................................................... 55
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
7/83
6
6.3.1 Sample ........................................................................................................... 55
6.3.2 Time ............................................................................................................... 55
6.3.3 IUIPC Model ................................................................................................... 55
6.4 Summary of the Study .......................................................................................... 56
7.0 Appendices ................................................................................................................ 57
Appendix One Personal Reflection .......................................................................... 57
Appendix Two Ethics Form ...................................................................................... 58
Appendix Three Questionnaire Levels of Concern .................................................. 61
Appendix Four Questionnaire General Concerns for Privacy .................................. 64
Appendix Five Questionnaire IUIPC Model .............................................................. 66
Appendix Six Participant Consent Form............................................................... 69
Appendix Seven Interview Transcripts .................................................................... 71
Transcript 1 ............................................................................................................. 72
Transcript 2 ............................................................................................................. 74
Transcript 3 ............................................................................................................. 76
8.0 References ................................................................................................................ 78
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
8/83
7
List of Tables and Graphs
Graphs:
Tables:
Table Title Page
1.0 Ranking Scale of Respondents Level of Privacy Concern 401.1 Top 5 Concerns for Privacy Online: Male 41
1.2 Top 5 Concerns for Privacy Online: Female 41
2.0 Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns Model:
Measurement of Central Tendency & Dispersion
42/43
2.1 Cross Tabulation: General Concern for Privacy Online & The
Importance of The right to Control Disclosed Data
45
2.2 Cross Tabulation: Frequency of Privacy Invasion & The
Importance of Being Made Aware of Disclosed Data Use
46
3.0 Semi-Structured Interview Questions 47
3.1 Responses 1 483.2 Responses 2 49
Figure Title Page
1.0 Age 35
1.1 Gender (Percentage) 35
1.2 Gender (Number) 35
1.3 Frequency of Internet Use 36
1.4 Location of Internet Use 36
1.5 Invasion of Privacy Frequency 37
1.6 General Concerns for Privacy 381.7 Concern for Information Collected by Unknown Entities 38
1.8 Concerns for Family & Friends Accessing Personal Data 38
1.9 Levels of Concern for Privacy Online 38
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
9/83
8
1.0 Background
Many businesses have progressed from product orientated characteristics to a more
market orientated approach (Kotler and Zaltman, 1971) and therefore many marketers
have identified the importance of understanding the consumer within a marketing
environment (Narver and Slater, 1990).
This market orientated approach has led many firms to adopt a number of techniques
(such as direct marketing) to establish marketing relationships with consumers and
sustain competitive advantage (Jaworski, 1990). Although relationship building
mechanisms bring benefits to both consumers and firms, it also carries with it a
number of problems concerning consumer apprehensions of disclosing personal data
due to the worry of privacy loss and therefore has implications to a firms ability to
conduct business (Foxman & Kilcoyne, 1993).
Authors such as White (2004) state information privacy online is of concern to
individuals due to the ease of which personal data can be shared and collected,
therefore many privacy rights advocates have called for organisations to revaluate the
nature of consumer data collection methods.
The purpose of this research is to gather an understanding of the implications of
consumer attitudes towards information privacy in the online environment. The study
will look to build upon past research that has identified a need for control, collection
and awareness of the use and obtainment of disclosed data as key areas affecting
consumer online privacy concerns.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
10/83
9
1.1Importance of the Study
Consumer concerns for information privacy take on an amplified importance in the
online context, consumers willingness to disclose personal information is impacted
greatly due to the levels of high risk in the online environment. This consequentially
impacts on a firms ability to conduct business (Li, 2012).
The study therefore attempts to build an understanding of consumer attitudes
towards information privacy, as a better understanding of consumer apprehensions of
disclosing data is vital for companies to implement mechanisms that reduce these
apprehensions of disclosing personal data.
1.2 Research Question
The purpose of this research study is to gather an understanding of the implications of
consumer attitudes towards online information privacy. Therefore the research
question proposed is what are the implications of consumer privacy attitudes towards
online information privacy in the wake of invasive marketing methods?
1.3 Limitations
Some limitations of the study have occurred mainly surrounding the sample size and
time constraints.
1.3.1 Sample
Due to the time and budget constraints it was difficult to collect data from a vast range
of people, instead the study focused mainly on University students. A wider selection
of respondents would most probably give a broader range of results as factors such as
age, profession and also internet usage would vary greatly. Furthermore compared to
older generations, students are more likely to use a vast array of internet media
communications and therefore may be more comfortable in participating in online
business transactions (Baek and Morimoto, 2012), although acting as a limitation in
the study the argument can be made that this particular age group is an important
consumer within the online environment.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
11/83
10
2.0 Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
The subject of information privacy can be seen as very complicated area amongst
many studies such as economics, law, management, psychology, information systems
and marketing, providing various in depth perspectives (Pavlou, 2011). In terms of the
marketing perspective personal information is an important component to many
organisations and industries as there is a recognised need for greater consumer insight
in order to serve consumers with the best quality goods and services the company can
offer. Consumers also now understand that without disclosing some form of personal
information they cannot receive the best service from an organisation. The
information revolution has helped facilitate the global connection of people in more
ways than one. Consumers and companies have more power now with help from the
internet than they have done in history. However, with this new found ability to
communicate on unprecedented levels threats do occur and consumers do reflect
some worry regarding the inappropriate use, collection and distribution of their
information. In 2011 TRUSTe conducted a survey among 1,000 members of its onlineconsumer panel and found that 38% were concerned about their privacy with 23%
worried about security. This worry amongst consumers has grown and has not been
helped with recent failings by companies such as Sony and Apple who have been at
the forefront of global privacy outrages. As new data collection methods are
introduced and consumers feel their privacy online is fading, companies face a
challenge in guaranteeing their privacy policies and marketing actions reassure the
interests of customers and stakeholders.
2.2 The States, Dimensions and Functions of Privacy
Alan Westin (1967) identified, within the concept of privacy, four states are present:
Intimacy, Solitude, Reserve and Anonymity. He believed that each condition
contributes to the make-up of privacy respectively, for example intimacy is the state of
preserving seclusion within a small unit such as family whereas anonymity is the cause
of being in a wider environment such as the public whilst being granted the ability to
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
12/83
11
remain unknown, or free from identification. Furthermore four functions of privacy
were also discovered; personal autonomy, self-evaluation, emotional release and
limited communication (Westin, 1967). These functions provide an individual with
many social and emotional benefits such as the ability to act with independence
through the function of personal autonomy, and also allowing someone the space to
relieve pressures through the function of emotional release (Lanier & Saini, 2008;
Shils, 1959; Goffman 1959). Clarke (1997) proposed a definition of privacy, which was:
The interest that individuals have in sustaining a personal space, free from
interference by other people and organisations
This classification of privacy ensued Clarke to note a number of dimensions within the
concept:
Privacy of The Person: Concerned with the privacy of a persons body such as
samples of DNA being taken without consent.
Privacy of Personal Behaviour: This dimension highlights the issues concerning
the discretion ofa persons behaviour within society such as their sexualorientation or religious belief.
Privacy of Personal Communications: This calls for the need to limit
surveillance of a persons communication channels. The last decade has seen
technological communications become so advanced that the issue has become
especially prevalent.
Privacy of Personal Data: The most common dimension within the marketing
environment, deals with a persons personal data and the need for individuals
to possess some form of control over the dissemination of this data. Also
known as information privacy.
(Clarke, 1997)
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
13/83
12
This review will focus mainly on Information Privacy or Privacy of an individuals
Personal Data, as most studies conducted concerning consumer privacy has focused
on this paradigm.
2.2.1 Information Privacy
Clarkes (1997) study of privacy and the dimensions that make up the complex notion
identified information privacy as a key dimension of the notion of privacy. This has led
other authors to also focus on the key dimension of information privacy. Burgoon et al
(1989) makes note that the function of information privacy resonates with an
individuals right to exercise some control over how data about the self will be used
and shared with other people or firms. DeCew (1997) has identified accessibility
privacy as a dimension that overlaps with information privacy in situations where the
attempted collection of information consists of gaining access to an individual. This
led DeCew (1997) to identify expressive privacy whereby individualsprotect a realm
for expressing ones self-identity or personhood through speech or activity. It protects
the ability to decide to continue or to modify ones behaviour when the activity in
question helps define oneself as a person, shielded from interference, pressure and
coercion from government or from other individuals
2.3 Consumer Privacy
Although there are many different delineations of the concept of information privacy,
many authors agree on an important element within the construct of the notion, the
need for control over the potential secondary use of a persons personal information
(Belanger et al, 2002). Goodwin (1991) published a study integrating behavioural
literature and public policies surrounding privacy with consumer concerns of the
concept. He defined consumer privacy as:
the consumers ability to control (a) presence of other people in the environment
during a market transaction or consumption behaviour and (b) dissemination of
information related to or provided during such transactions or behaviours to those who
were (Goodwin, 1991)
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
14/83
13
His proposed definition of consumer privacy encompassed two main elements; the
first being the social dimensions of privacy touching upon the ability to have some
control over the presence of others within the consumers environment during a
transaction, such as the number of interferences from other marketers and also the
presence of other consumers (Lanier & Saini, 2008; Milne & Gordon 1993). The second
part of the definition relates to the marketing and professional use of the information,
provided by the consumer, and the ability to control unwarranted intrusions into their
personal environment (Mascarenhas, 2003). Other studies have developed another
important dimension of consumer privacy (Foxman & Kilcoyne, 1993) noting the
importance of consumer knowledge within the make-up of consumer privacy,
referring to the level of which firms inform consumers about the information practices
and their privacy rights with regards to the submitting of personal data (Nowak &
Phelps, 1997).
2.3.1 Consumer Privacy Concerns
Privacy concerns have been present in the marketplace for decades, organisations
such as supermarkets, magazine companies, financial entities, insurance companies
and even medical firms have understood the data they gather from their consumers
holds a great deal of value to the firm itself and also to other organisations (Milne,
2000). The common practice of data collection within most industries has been
integrated and amplified in alignment with technological advances, allowing the mass
storage of digitised consumer information (Mascarenhas, 2003). Consequently, this
has resulted in high levels of concern for many consumers and their privacy. Phelps et
al (2000) note, high levels of privacy concerns from an individual are most notable
when a consumer has been alerted to the unsolicited use of their personal data.
Consumers usually become aware of unsolicited use of their personal data when they
receive promotions related to recent transactions (Lanier & Saini, 2008). Interestingly
however, Nowak & Phelps (1995) found that when organisations seek permission to
use a persons data, consumers feel less concerned about their privacy. Understanding
privacy concerns has resulted in many organisations identifying the need to alert
consumers of the firms information practices through the use of opt-out or opt-in
instruments and privacy policies (Milne & Rohm, 2000).
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
15/83
14
2.4 The Collection of Consumer Data Online
Increasingly marketers have identified the responsibility and risk involved when
unveiling new products or services to uncertain market environments, recognising the
competitive need for sophisticated research and planning on the wants, needs,
attitudes and behaviour of potential customers (Kotler & Zaltman, 1971; Foxman &
Kilcoyne, 1993). This has resulted in many marketers using a broad variety of
techniques to accumulate consumer data and create databases of information which
hold a great deal of commercial value (Milne, 2000). Winer (2001) has noted that the
information technology revolution and the World Wide Web has presented an
opportunity to business which allows them to choose how they communicate with
their customers in ways which werent previously conceivable. The ability to interact
directly to requests made and serve the customer with a highly interactive tailored
experience has allowed organisations to create, improve and sustain long term
relationships (Nowak and Phelps, 1992; Winer, 2001).
2.4.1 The Implications of Online Data Collection
However, the arrival of the internet has also introduced many consumer privacy
concerns with regards to the various pieces of information online shopping leaves
behind such as search history, comparison-shopping, purchasing and post-purchase
information (Claudil & Murphy, 2000). Collection of such data can lead to identifying a
consumers favoured selection of specific products, brands, retailers and also personal
habits and interests (Sheehan & Hoy, 2000). Issues occur when organisations identify
this as an opportunity to facilitate the process of unsanctioned collection, illicit use,
cross-matching, disclosure and sale of personal information as an outcome of
consumer activity online (Mascarenhas, 2003; Lee et al, 2011). Christiansen (2011)
identified a number of circumstances of online disclosures that create privacy
concerns; one of which was involuntary disclosure the method of collecting data and
tracking behaviour of online users without notifying them. A tool frequently adopted
for this is the use of cookies, this technology functions by persistently tracking a user
whilst they visit and click through different websites, consequently building a user
profile from the data collected (Vega, 2010). Another tool that follows a similar trend
to cookies is Deep Packet Inspection (DPI); this method produces a rather more
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
16/83
15
detailed profile of consumers and involves the reading and analysing of packets of
information resultant of online user activity (Stecklow and Sonne, 2010). The method
of web scraping, a rather questionable act of data collection, comprises collection of
personal details shared by users on forum discussions and social media sites for the
purpose of creating personal profiles of particular users; most information collected
using this method is shared on private member only networks and is intended to be
confidential (Angwin and Stecklow, 2010). A recent example of this use of data
collection appeared in 2010 when the healthcare website patientslikeme.com noticed
an intruder had accessed one of the sites discussion boards and with the use of
sophisticated software was scraping all of the messages on the forum, it was later
identified that the intruder was part of Nielsen Co, a private New York media-research
firm (Angwing and Stecklow, 2010). Digital-device fingerprinting is one of the most
criticised forms of tracking, the method works by collecting transmitted information
from connected devices such as details of the operating system and browser versions,
these signals are then shaped into a unique persistent fingerprint for specific devices;
this indicator is used for similar purposes as the cookie technology of targeting and
frequency capping (Angwin and Valentino-DeVries, 2010). With so many opportunities
of data collection available to marketers, there has never been a time where detailed,
accurate well informed personal profiles of consumers can be built and consequently
sold amongst companies (Mascarenhas, 2003). Franzak (2003) calls attention to
customers adopting feelings of insecurity with regards to the application of invasive
methods of data collection and the acquiescence of control over the methods. Privacy
violations transpire when firms use its customers information for uses of which the
customer did not sanction at the time when personal data was submitted (Nakra,
2001). Consumer Privacy concerns have been present much before the introduction of
the internet, however the ease of which mass information can be collected and
disseminated without consent is the reason why it has become a much spoken about
topic (Ho, 1999).
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
17/83
16
2.5 Theoretical Frameworks of Individual Attitudes and
Behaviours towards Online Information Privacy
Several studies have been written and developed from a variety of theoretical
backgrounds regarding the growing concerns of individuals information privacy in the
online environment (Belanger, 2011; Li, 2011; Pavlou, 2011). Many theories illustrated
by a number of researchers highlight the foundation of consumer privacy concerns
online and the consequential behavioural attitudes to share personal data during an
online transaction (Li, 2012).
2.5.1 Theory of Reasoned Action & the Theory of Reasoned
Behaviour
Fishbein and Ajzen, (1995) conducted research of social psychology identifying the
relationship between a persons behavioural intention towards certain conduct and
the likelihood ofthe individual acting in alignment with that conduct. A persons
behavioural intention can be used to predict an individuals attitude towards the
specified behaviour and environmental perceptions (Peace et al, 2003); this is known
as the theory of reasoned action (TRA). The theory of reasoned action functions on the
basis of a persons intention of a particular behaviour, intentions are encompassed by
attitude and subjective norms (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1980). The attitude of an individual is
established as the comprehensive evaluation of a behaviour, which in turn is
determined by the individuals belief of the behavioural outcome and the expected
occurrence or effect of the outcome (Li, 2011). The subjective norms on the other
hand represent a persons judgement of the social norms carried by others, and the
importance of avoiding or embracing these actions (Li, 2011). From the theory ofreasoned action, Ajzen (1991) identified the development of the theory of reasoned
behaviour (TRB) which encompassed the belief that an individuals free-willed
behaviour relies on both motivation and ability, the motivation is driven by the
subjective norms, attitude and the perceived behavioural control. Furthermore Li
(2011) gives the example that an individuals attitude of sharing personal data is driven
by the anticipated benefits and risks of the sharing behaviour, the corresponding
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
18/83
17
strengths of the two beliefs within a specific environment determines a persons
attitude.
2.5.2 Social Contract Theory
Many authors have identified the Social Contact Theory as another component of the
origins of privacy concerns (Milne & Gordon, 1993; Donaldson et al, 1994). Li (2011)
highlights that this theory shows when an individual facilitates their personal data to
an online retailer, it not only encompass a monetary exchange but also involves a
social exchange (creating relationships) and therefore a social contract is created,
which is defined as the understood responsibilities of the individuals involved, making
it a critical element ofpreventing the online merchant taking advantage of consumers
personal data. The theory falls in alignment with Hoffman et als (1999) argument that
when individuals make an online transaction they cannot do so anonymously,
therefore they look to establish a social exchange involving a social contract and an
economic contract to limit the possible risks attached to the purchase. Culnan &
Armstrong (1999) also make the important note that it is important for online
businesses to ensure their websites are presented in a manner that will supress
consumer privacy apprehensions, because if a potential customer perceives the
website will not fully engage in a social contract they will most likely not engage in an
exchange relationship. As Culnan & Bies (2003) have found when applying the Social
Contract framework in a transactional environment between a merchant and a
consumer, the consumer enters a cost-benefit evaluation at the point of exchanging
their personal data. Many researchers have identified that this evaluation, known as
the trade-off evaluation or risk-benefit analysis, conducted by the consumer is
based on the potential benefits of sharing personal data weighed against the
competing factor of the possible dissemination of this data (negative outcomes) (Dinev
et al, 2008; Milne & Gordon, 1993). This common approach adopted by consumers is
known as the privacy calculus (Li, 2011).
Control of Personal Data
Many studies centring on the social contract theory identify the close relationship it
has with the notion of procedural justice, also known as due process (Tyer, 1994;Gilliland, 1993). Procedural justice is identified as the element of fairness and
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
19/83
18
transparency in the conduct of certain procedures, which also encompass the
individuals ability to have some control over the procedures (Tyler, 1994; Malhotra et
al, 2004). This essentially means consumers will call for the need of some control to
have a prevalent effect on a firms information practices that they dont think is
appropriate (Malhotra et al, 2004). Lanier and Saini (2008) note that a consumers
desire for control is especially important in the online environment as the likelihood of
personal data being used for unprincipled benefits is high and will consequently break
many social contract established. Alge (2001) also states that when individuals
exchange personal data, they do so in a highly risky environment (online) and
therefore the mechanisms behind a social contract need to establish enough control
for the consumer to manipulate the dissemination of their data. This has led Claudill
and Murphy (2002) to suggest consumer concerns for privacy, focus on how much
control they have over their personal data through mechanisms of exit and approval.
Some studies have recognised individual needs for control of the use and
dissemination of personal data (Malhotra et al, 2004). Authors such as Phelps et al
(2002) have established in their study consumers have called for a requirement of
more control in order to limit unwanted marketing communications online.
Collection of Personal Data
Data collection is one of the fundamental principles of consumer privacy concerns and
is at the core of many organisational objectives in an e-commerce environment
(Mascarenhas, 2003). In the context of consumer privacy concerns, collection can be
understood as the extent of which an individual is apprehensive regarding the volume
of personal data required in relation to the possible outcomes achieved in providing
personal data (Culnan and Bies, 2003). Malhotra et al (2004) summarise a fair
exchange as the process in which individuals provide personal data in exchange for a
service or product once they have assessed the exchange will be beneficial to them. If
the assessment results in negative outcomes as a result of the exchange, consumers
will avoid the situation (Cohen, 1987).
Awareness of Information Practices
As many studies have sought to define privacy in the context of the consumer
(Goodwin, 1991; Clarke, 1999; Lanier & Saini, 2008) citing control of personal data as a
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
20/83
19
key construct, some authors suggest the consumer also needs to hold some degree of
awareness of the collection of data (Foxman & Kilcoyne, 1993). Awareness differs from
control with the respect that its a slightly mellow element of information privacy, as it
is concerned with the level of which a consumer is aware of a firms information
privacy practices (Malhotra et al, 2004; Culnan, 1995). Sheehan & Hoy (2000) note
awareness compliments the control element of the social contract theory but is very
different from control in practice.
2.5.3 Privacy Calculus
Laufer and Wolfe (1977) conducted research into the concept of privacy and the issues
surrounding it and attempted to apply a multidimensional theory on the notion. Hann
et al (2007) state from this research one can identify that in an organisational
environment individuals carry out a calculus of behaviour in examining the positive
and negative consequences of providing personal data. Many studies particularly
identify the consumers need to carry out a risk-benefit analysis with regards to the
exchange of some social or economic benefit, a review of all the components linked to
the exchange situation is extremely beneficial in order to measure whether personal
data shared will be used appropriately and not carry any negative implications (Culnan
& Armstrong, 1999; Xu et al, 2009). Li (2012) makes the important observation that
although many studies highlight the benefit and risk factors that affect the intention to
disclose personal data and the privacy calculus, authors who are generally
implementing the privacy calculus theory do so in alignment with other theoretical
frameworks such as the expectancy theory and utility maximisation theory which
consequently provide a richer understanding of the mechanics of the privacy calculus.
2.6 Measuring Consumer Privacy Concerns (CFIP & IUIPC
Models)
One of the earliest studies that attempted to understand privacy concerns amongst
individuals was Smith et als (1996) approach which resulted in the development of
the Concern for Information Privacy model (CFIP) which was of a latent construct
nature. The model measured four distinct factors; collection, secondary use, errors and
unauthorised access, noting these factors as the dimensions that consisted of an
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
21/83
20
individuals concern for privacy (Smith et al, 1996). However the limitation of this
model was its unintended use to be applied in an online context. Therefore Malhotra
et al (2004) identified the need to develop a model that could measure information
privacy concerns within the online environment. The Internet Users Information
Privacy Concerns model (IUIPC) was the consequential outcome, the higher-order
construct scale works on the basis of the Social Contract Theory and measures the
three dimensions of Control, Collection and Awareness (Malhotra et al, 2004).
Buchanan et al (2006) have also administered a study, in the field of psychology, in
attempt to measure privacy attitudes online; however their attempted research was
focused on identifying general concerns for privacy. It encompasses the use of a 16
point scale that measures different types of general online concerns respondents may
have, each response is measured using a 5 point Likert Scale of awareness. It also
looked to understanding the actions individuals were taking to protect privacy, using
the constructs ofGeneral Caution and Technical Protection (Buchanan et al, 2006).
2.7 Organisational Factors of Theoretical Privacy Concerns
Many studies have established an individuals assessment of the risks and advantages
associated with certain behavioural motivations. These behaviours have consequently
required organisations to adopt certain practices that positively influence a
consumers behavioural beliefs of the risk and benefits associated with privacy
concerns.
2.7.1 Procedural Fairness Theory
Culnan and Armstrong (1999) state, many organisations make use of procedural
fairness with their use of Fair Information Practices (FIP). Lind and Tyler (1988) make
mention of procedural fairness as the individuals perception ofan activity, of which
they are involved in, is carried out so in fair circumstances. Furthermore, in order to
achieve high levels of procedural fairness perceptions organisations must ensure
consumers have, to some degree, the ability to control the outcomes of a
transactional activity (Lind and Tyler, 1988; Culnan and Armstrong, 1999; Folger and
GreenBerg, 1985). Within the context of personal information sharing, the procedural
fairness theory identifies that individuals are open to sharing their personal data and
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
22/83
21
consequently allow the dissemination of this information but only when there exists
procedures (such as FIP) that safeguard ones privacy (Culnan and Armstrong, 1999).
2.7.2 Social Presence Theory
Sheehan and Hoy (2000) found a factor driving an individuals concern for security and
information privacy online is the situation of the seller and buying being physically
separate from each other during a transaction. Short et al (1976) identify an
individuals need for intimacy and psychological closeness is related to the concept of
social presence, this notion functions in alignment with the social dimensions of
online marketing interactions (Pavlou et al, 2007). Authors such as Kumar and
Benbasar (2002) further identify the social presence theory relates to the reduction of
perceived social distances between the consumer and the merchant, therefore e-
commerce platforms should look to achieve a close relationship with consumers in
order to reduce concerns of sharing personal data. Studies such as Tu, (2002) however
have found the implementation of a social actor provides little reassurance to the
consumer.
2.7.3 Social Response Theory
Studies carried out by Wang et al (2007) have identified that individuals will share
personal data when they acknowledge that other parties, such as consumers and
organisations, also share data similar to that of the individual. Lee et al (2008) state,
when an individual decides to share personal data a social exchange relationship is
formed between the merchant and consumer, which works on the basis that the one
receiving the private data should in return disclose information of a similar nature.
Therefore a firms online marketing platform may work in alignment with these factors
by aiming to implement reciprocal relationships with individuals to gather richer
consumer information (Li, 2012).
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
23/83
22
2.8 Development of an Hypothesis
There is a phenomenal amount of research and discussion established regarding
consumer concerns in the online environment. Many authors have identified the
consumers need for control over personal data as a defining factor of sharing data (Li,
2012; Culnan and Armstrong, 1999) amongst other factors such as awareness of
information use and fair practice conduct of the firm (Sheehan and Hoy, 2000).
The purpose of the research is to understand the attitudes held by consumers relating
to their ability to control the dissemination of their data, their attitudes towards
awareness of personal data collection and also their attitudes towards the use of their
personal information i.e. online advertising and personal email relating to offering.
2.8.1 Hypothesis
H1: Consumers will respond positively for the need for control of personal data.
H2: Consumers will respond positively for the need for organisations to make clear
their intended use of personal data.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
24/83
23
3.0 Methodology
3.1 Chapter Introduction
In order to proceed with the research question proposed, an exploration into research
methods that will aid the cause for a conclusion needed to be established. This
chapter will discuss the approach adopted to tackle the research question and also
justifications for the strategy.
3.2 Research Purpose
The literature identified a growing concern for online information privacy amongst
consumers; many consumers fell apprehensive towards the sharing of personal data
with online organisations due to the high risk involved. Consumer apprehensions
towards sharing data consequently has negative impacts on an organisations ability to
conduct business.
The research therefore aimed to develop an understanding of the level of concerns
consumers have towards the disclosure of personal data by exploring the key areas of
the Social Contract Theory, which found Control, Collection and Awareness to be at
the heart of consumer privacy concerns. Saunders et al (2012) define research that
aims to gather insights from a topic of interest as an exploratory study, noting studies
of this nature are especially useful to clarify an understanding of a problem.
3.3 Research Philosophies
The nature of the study called for the need to develop new knowledge with regards to
the notion, dimensions and states of privacy and how an individuals need for privacy
effects the decision to disclose personal information in a transactional environment.
Furthermore the research question focused on the concerns for privacy on an online
platform, as this channel of communication has been the focus of much debate.
Saunders et al (2012), notes that the research philosophy is the development of
knowledge in a particular field, more specifically the research philosophy implemented
is considered as the assumption of the writers view of the world. Johnson and Clarke
note there is a great deal of importance in understanding the philosophical
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
25/83
24
commitments one makes with regards to the strategy adopted as this will impact on
the ability to not only carry out certain research methods but also how an
understanding of the research is achieved.
The studys characteristics meant that to understand concerns consumers hold
towards disclosure of information, data regarding their attitudes towards certain
situations of information disclosure was the most suitable form of research strategy.
Thus akin to a positivist approach, as Gill and Johnson (2010) note this form of
research philosophy embraces the position of the natural scientist where the
collection of data about a distinct reality is subjected to analyses in order to achieve
formal generalisations of regularities and causal relationships within the findings.
Furthermore due to the limitations of budget and time constraints, another appealing
component of the positivist philosophy is the cheap nature and value-free stance that
can be taken. The value-free assumption plays on the basis that the researcher is value
neutral, having no value judgements, this has created some criticisms that a value-free
outcome becomes totally objective (Crotty, 1998). This stance also has an element of
independence, Remenyi et al (1998) write that researchers arent dependent on
anyone nor does the subject of research have any considerable effect on an outcome.
The initial stages of the research gathered a simple broad understanding of consumer
concerns of information disclosure; this then left room to further interrogate the
research initially gathered to gain a richer understanding of consumer apprehensions.
Some authors believe that the positivism approach overlooks the emotional human
element, a component which cannot be ignored (Johnson, 2002). Instead positivist
researchers use a highly structured methodology to assist with the interrogation of
data. Arguments note that the strategy is limited and has disadvantages as the
intricacies of social areas of business makes it very difficult to approach people being
detached from their social contexts (Saunders et al, 2010). Measuring consumer
concerns through a quantitative method did limit the depth of the data gathered, as
the study aims to understand attitudes it is important to implement an interpretivist
attitude too. The interpretivism approach advocates the need for the researcher to
understand the differences between people in our roles as social actors (Easterby-
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
26/83
25
Smith et al, 2012). Mixes between qualitative and quantitative methods are highly
appropriate to gain a greater understanding of the study.
3.4 Research Approach
The aim of the research is to understand the levels of concern consumers have with
regards to the sharing of their personal data. Therefore in order to measure concerns
it was important to apply a research technique that could gather a vast number of
responses in a simple informative manner. Saunders et al (2012) notes quantitative
research is usually conducted in alignment with positivism.
Within the literature an important origin of consumer privacy identified was the Social
Contract Theory, therefore the research approach worked on the basis to test this
theoretical framework by using the three key components, Collection, Control and
Awareness in a quantitative manner to measure consumer attitudes towards
situations related these three constructs. Saunders et al (2012) note that the research
design will be influenced by either two approaches identified as Deductive and
Inductive, deductive being the approach where propositions developed in
accordance with theory are tested and analysed to find if the theory is true or false.
The deductive approach within research allows the search and explanation of causal
relationships to be identified between different concepts and variables (Saunders et al,
2012).
3.5 Research Strategy
As the study encompassed the need to understand consumer attitudes towards online
information privacy, the use of both quantitative and qualitative methods proved vital
in the aim to, firstly develop an initial understanding of online privacy concerns linked
to the theory of Social Contract and then secondly through the use of qualitative
research, gain a richer understanding of consumer concerns for privacy and disclosure
of data online.
As the nature of the approach is Deductive, Saunders et al (2012) note the common
strategy adopted in alignment with deductive research is the survey strategy
whereby research is designed in accordance with who what and how many type of
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
27/83
26
questions. The survey strategy served as an appropriate tool when gathering
respondents levels of concerns and attitudes as these emotions are usually gathered
by asking the question how? and what?. Furthermore Saunders et al (2012) note,
surveys that usually adopt questionnaires help facilitate the collection of standardised
data from a large population in very economical circumstances.
Therefore the use of this method was especially important due to the time constraints
the study had to gather data, questionnaires served as a good method of collecting
data from a vast number of respondents; however Silverman (2000) states
quantitative methods do not allow the research to be evaluated in great depth.
Easterby-Smith et al (2012) understand that quantitative methods are an important
part of the research process identifying what features best give a story of the data and
then search for patterns within the data to develop conclusions of the studys
research. This simple process of summarizing and developing conclusions allowed the
research findings to be illustrated efficiently. Qualitative methods generally study the
meanings and relationships of participant (Saunders et al, 2012) and served as a
relevant tool to pull out in depth insights of consumer concerns for privacy established
in the quantitative phase.
As the strategic method integrates two methods of research, the timing within the
process conducted a sequential mixed method research approach as two phases of
data collection and analysis needed to be established. Sequential mixed methods
research is conducted with more than one phase of data collection and analysis and
allows the ability to further understand or elaborate on a preliminary set of findings
(Saunders et al, 2012). The double-phase research design adopted was the sequential
explanatory approach, whereby the quantitative data methods are followed by
qualitative research to gain further insight (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2007). The
chosen research strategy is directed by firstly the aim of the research question, which
is to gain an understanding of consumer privacy attitudes towards online marketing
methods, secondly the research philosophy of which this adheres to, thirdly the
approach adopted and finally the purpose of the research.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
28/83
27
3.5.1 Questionnaire
The nature of this study called for the use of a closed end questionnaire which
encompassed the use of ordinal variables, this data collection method presents the
respondent with predefined answers to choose from.
The questionnaire was designed in accordance with Malhotra et als (2004) IUIPC
model of measuring privacy attitudes specifically focusing on the dimensions of
Control, Awareness and Collection of personal data online. Questions were designed in
accordance of each dimension. Secondly, the questionnaire also looked to build upon
Buchanan et als (2006) 16 point scale to measure respondents general privacy
concerns online. The questionnaire implemented a 5 point Likert Scale to measure
both the respondent attitudes towards control, awareness and collection and also
their general concern for privacy online. The First stage of measuring attitude using
the IUIPC scale was done so with a level of agreement Likert Scale the second phase
used a level of concern Likert Scale.
Justifications
As the study takes on an explanatory research approach it called for the use of
questionnaires. Saunders et al (2009) state the use of questionnaires allows the
researcher to retrieve data quickly and efficiently, Robson (2002) further state that the
use of standardised questions allows the respondent interpretations to follow a similar
trend. The use of questionnaires was also used to create an initial understanding of
consumer privacy attitudes which would then be investigated further through the use
of qualitative research to drive a richer understanding; Saunders et al (2009) also write
that questionnaires can be used in a multiple-methods research design to compliment
other more exploratory methods of research. Easterby-Smith et al (2012) make note of
the great importance of designing the questionnaire in a manner that can be easily
read and also analysed, uses of the Likert scale allow both the respondent and
researcher to efficiently carry out their required actions. Also basing the survey on
existing models of research reinforces the reliability of the collection method (Bell,
2005).
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
29/83
28
3.5.2 Interviews
To gain a richer understanding of consumer privacy attitudes a semi-structured
interview was also conducted following on from the questionnaires. The objective of
the interview was to further discuss the reasons behind privacy concerns online.
Saunders et al (2009) define semi-structured interviews as the process where a list of
themes and questions are established by the researcher; furthermore the loose
structure of the interview leaves room for omitting certain questions in regards to the
interview (Easterby-Smith et al, 2012). Therefore this method allowed the interview to
be integrated from the basis of the questionnaire, as the theme of the interview was
based upon the social contract theory. The participants were selected from those who
agreed to take part with further questioning, which was asked within the
questionnaire, this was prompted as the need to ask respondents who are interested
in the subject matter will in turn gain richer insight as Stokes and Bergin (2006) note
the researcher should look for people who understand the research subject to some
degree.
Justifications
Many authors identify a variety of different types of interview (Healey, 1991; Robson,
2002; Saunders et al, 2012) all of which note that interviews take either a highly formal
structured approach or adopt the opposite which consists of an informal unstructured
design. Although, Easterby-Smith et al (2012) identify that a correct single approach
doesnt exist but the form of research being implemented holds an important role
when deciding which type of interview design to choose. Saunders et al (2009) defines
the two interview approaches as structured and semi-structured. Regarding the first
approach (structured interviews) the authors write it takes on a predetermined
standardised basis, each question is read out and the interview process sticks by the
set questions rarely moving away from them. The semi-structured interviews though
take on a slightly relaxed approach; the researcher covers pre-established themes and
questions which may vary with each interview (Saunders et al, 2009). Furthermore
Denscombe (2003) writes that the semi-structured format allows the researcher to
take on more control over the nature of the responses and the length of the answers,
something which isnt quite so prevalent in structured interviews.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
30/83
29
3.6 Time Horizons
The planning of the research needed to be measured carefully, and consequently the
research study took on a cross-sectional approach. The basis of the research was
conducted amongst consumers privacy attitudes towards online marketing methods;
this was done so at one point in time. Saunders et al (2012) refer to cross-sectional
time horizons as the study of a certain occurrence at particular time. With the study
making use of a mixed method approach, time was of the essence as the gathering of
both forms of quantitative and qualitative required a lot of time. Three weeks were set
to reach a total of 113 respondents via the questionnaire and 3 semi-structured
interviews completed. Also time was set to analyse the research gathered. Hague et al
(2004) note that thorough planning before beginning an academic research study
should be carried out to limit the chances of missing deadlines, furthermore although
good quality research can be achieved during a short period of time some quality will
be affected negatively.
3.7 Research Conduct
3.7.1 SamplingThe nature of the study leaves room for the ability to test a wide range of people,
however due to the time constraints and the practical implications of this it was
important to select a sample. A number of researchers highlight that the practice of
choosing a sample leads to the possibility of gathering detailed accurate research,
identifying a small number of people also creates the opportunity of spending more
time designing a means of collecting data (Henry, 1990; Saunders et al, 2009). There
are two types of sampling identified by Saunders et al (2009), probability sampling and
non-probability sampling; these two techniques involve key differences as probability
sampling involves the means to answer research questions that require the need to
estimate characteristics of a population statistically. Non-probability sampling
however is compounded by the inability to know the probability of each case being
chosen and also the impossible nature of answering questions to address objectives
that need statistical conclusions. For this study a cluster sampling technique was
administered and the sample chosen was University students attending the University
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
31/83
30
of Northampton. Although this sample may have many implications contributing to
the restrictive stance it holds, students are one of the main internet and smart-phone
users and are an important segment to consider.
3.8 Data Analysis
3.8.1 Data quality
It is crucial to this study that the quality of data is of a high standard to ensure that a
successful conclusive end can be achieved. Quality of data can be split into two main
areas the reliability and validity of data.
3.8.2 ReliabilityThe reliability of the research is referred to the degree of which the data collection
methods and consequently the analytical processes can create consistent findings
(Easterby-Smith et al, 2012). Robson (2002) notes four components that may have
implications to the reliability of the research data; Participant Error, Participant Bias,
Observer Error and Observer Bias. To limit the effects of participant bias within the
study it was important to conduct the questionnaires at a time of the respondents
convenience, to achieve this amongst students, places of study were avoided as this
environment was an inappropriate location to disrupt. Instead the use of online
questionnaires was utilised as this method of collection allowed the participant to not
only choose a time but they were also given the ability to choose the environment to
complete the survey. All physical forms of the survey were distributed by asking the
possible respondents first if they would like to participate. The steps taken to avoid a
participant bias were to grant the respondent with the option of anonymity. The risk
of observer error didnt apply to the closed questions nature of the questionnaire
nevertheless the interviews conducted were open ended and subject to influence, the
threat to reliability however was reduced with the implementation of predetermined
questions asked word for word with the only time an additional question would be
asked was if there arose an opportunity to develop better insight, and also if the
answers were straying away from the relevant topic.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
32/83
31
3.8.3 Validity
Easterby-Smith et al write the validity of a research project is the extent of which the
findings provide an accurate representation of the concepts they are supposed to be
describing. Saunders et al (2009) has noted the key areas that pose a threat to the
research validity as History, Testing, Instrumentation, Mortality, Maturation and
Ambiguity.
In relation to the study, maturation posed a threat to the validity with regards to the
time between the respondents answering the questionnaire and then taking part with
an interview, during this time a great deal of information of online marketing data
collection methods could be learnt and directly impact the respondents view. To
minimise this occurrence, the interview was conducted within two days of receiving
the respondents questionnaire to limit the amount of external influence.
Instrumentation carries the possibility of affecting the research results via the
measurement tool used. In the instance of the study makes use of semi-structured
interviews, this called for the collection of information to be done so objectively and
thus the questions of the interview were predetermined.
3.9 Considerations
3.9.1 Ethical considerations
Ethical considerations are an important area to note within the make-up of the
research, Saunders et al (2009) note that the ethical concerns will emerge through the
planning stages and refers to the appropriateness of the researchers behaviour
towards those participating. When conducting research an option to grant anonymity
was given to the participants, as Saunders et al (2009) note this non-maleficence is
seen as the cornerstone of ethical issues. A summary of the research purpose was also
presented for the participant to gain an understanding of the research they were
partaking in. For classification purposes the survey asked for the respondents age and
gender; however each participant was informed that the purposes of the research
would not consist of the dissemination of personal data. Furthermore the only
instances that a name and contact details was required was when the respondent was
asked if they would be want to be involved in further study (semi-structured
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
33/83
32
interviews). To allow the participants to withdraw their information, a reference code
was given with a contact email; this allowed respondents to simply ask for the removal
of their data.
3.9.2 Budget Constraints
The financial constraints impeded the research study somewhat with regards to
travelling, this only impacted on the sample size as the ability to travel across the
country to survey a wider source of cases was not achievable.
3.9.3 Sample Constraints
The sample constraints consequently resulted in the data being slightly biased towards
a certain demographic of internet users, as University Students all share similar online
activities. Although this market of online consumers are a vital audience to consider,
the scope of the data analysis could have been a lot more in depth if different
demographics were also targeted for the research.
3.10 Chapter Summary
The overall purpose of the methodology is to test the hypothesis through firstly a
quantitative method involving questionnaires to quickly establish an understanding;
secondly the process of qualitative research encompassing semi-structured interviews
was explored to gain a richer understanding of the research topic.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
34/83
33
4.0 Results
4.1 Introduction
This section assembles the key research findings, obtained from both the
questionnaires and the semi-structured interviews, an analysis of the key findings
obtained from the questionnaires will be presented. The results section mainly focuses
on the questionnaire results and some insight in the key understandings gathered
from the interviews.
4.2 Questionnaire
The questionnaires made up the quantitative phase of the study, as stated in the
methodology, and were designed in accordance with Malhotra et als (2004) privacy
scale the Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns model (IUIPC) to measure
consumer attitudes with regards to three main constructs; Control, Collection and
Awareness. Furthermore the questionnaire also looked to gather some data on
respondents Internet usage and also their experience of privacy invasion online.
Additionally the questionnaire also implemented Buchanan et als (2006) 16 point
scale to measure the general privacy concerns people have on the internet.
The questionnaire used a five point Likert awareness scale (1=strongly disagree and
5=strongly agree) in accordance with the IUIPC model to measure consumer attitudes
on Control, Awareness and Collection of personal data. A five point Likert concern scale
(1=not at all concerned and 5=extremely concerned) was applied to measure
respondents general concern for privacy online. In total 113 questionnaires were
completed by a sample of University students attending the University of
Northampton.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
35/83
34
4.3 Summary of Respondents
4.3.1 Age & Gender
The sample of which the data was collected from consisted of University students
attending the University of Northampton, the survey was administered online once a
pilot study was completed which was conducted offline to five University Students.
The Pilot Study identified some items were unclear to the respondents and was
therefore amended.
All surveys were completed online. The
average age of the sample was 21.
Males (59%) were the majority
gender represented in the study,
compared to Females (41%).
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
36/83
35
4.4 Exploratory Data Analysis of Internet Use, Online Privacy
Concerns and Experience
4.4.1 Internet Usage
How often do you use the internet?
Unsurprisingly due to the nature
of the sample, all respondents
used the Internet at least more
than once a day. 94% of the
participants stated they use the
internet Several times a day.
Do you use the internet at least
once a week at either of the
following? University, Work,
Home, or Other?
28% of the responses stated
internet use occurred in other
locations; places such as Cafes,
Pubs and Smart Phones were
noted.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
37/83
36
4.4.2 Experiences of Privacy Invasion
How frequently have you personally been the victim of what you felt was an invasion
of privacy (e.g. receiving unsolicited phone calls, unsolicited emails, etc?)
A cumulative total of only 22% represented those who felt they were rarely or never
victims of privacy invasion.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
38/83
37
4.4.3 General Concerns for
Privacy Online
How concerned are you generally
about your privacy online?
43% of the respondents indicated
they were somewhat concerned
about their general privacy online.
How concerned are you about
personal information online being
accessed and collected by businesses
or people you dont know?
Over half of the respondents indicated
they were extremely concerned (53%)about their data being obtained by
people or businesses they dont know.
How concerned are you about
family or friends being able to
access your personal
information online?
61% of the respondents were Not
at all concerned about family or
friends accessing personal data.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
39/83
38
4.5 Central Tendency & Dispersion Measurement of
Respondents Level of Privacy Concerns Online
4.5.1 Attitudes of General Privacy Concerns Online
Table 1.0 represents the respondents level of concern for privacy online; it is
produced on the basis ofBuchanan et als (2006) 16 point privacy concern
measurement scale. For each item, respondents indicated how concerned they were
on a 5 point Likert scale where 1=not at all concerned and 5=extremely concerned.
General Concern for Online Privacy item was omitted from the scale leaving 15 items
to measure respondents concerns.
The Central Tendency measurement represents the average of the data set, for this
study the average is constructed of the Mean score for each item; from the Mean
respondents average level of concern was calculated from all 15 items. Dispersion
measures the diversity within a data set. Standard Deviation (SD) was used to reflect
how diverse peoples privacy concerns were for each item. Theres some evidence to
suggest that as the level of privacy importance decreases the SD value increases,
reflecting more varied attitudes amongst items of lower privacy concerns.
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
40/83
39
Table 1.0 Ranking Scale of Respondents Level of Privacy Concern (Descending order
of Concern)
Concern
Measure of
CentralTendency
Measure
ofDispersion
Mean(Level ofConcern)
StandardDeviation
4.82 0.38
4.78 0.42
4.63 0.64
4.36 0.66
3.76 0.84
3.66 0.79
3.58 0.75
2.96 0.69
2.73 0.65
2.45 0.65
2.19 0.58
2.12 0.60
2.05 0.50
1.83 0.52
1.44 0.53
High Concern
Low ConcernTable 1.0
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
41/83
40
The Privacy Concern Scale (Table 1.0) shows that the respondents felt any
unauthorised use or access of financial information was of high concern, as the two
highest ranked forms of online privacy online are items concerned with respondents
credit/debit cards being compromised either by interception during a transaction or
mischarged during a purchase. Both items also had the least variance (0.38 & 0.48)
showing a low variation of answers and therefore further reinforcing the high level of
concern. Furthermore high concerns were also notably attached to situations where
an individuals information would be compromised; Online Identity Theft and
Information collated by unknown entities were amongst the top five most concerned
items. Other individuals or organisations misrepresenting themselves online was less
of a concern to respondents, this may be due to the experience the sample have on
the internet as the majority stated they use the internet Several times a day (94%).
4.6 Cross Tabulation of General Privacy Concerns
4.6.1 Level of Concerns by Gender
Females showed a
marginally higher level of
concern (3.3) for online
privacy in comparison to
Males (3.1).
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
42/83
41
Top 5 Concerns for Privacy Online: Male
(N=number of respondents)
As stated in Table 1.0, concerns
related to financial information
being compromised ranked as
items of high concern. This also
resonated with the male
respondents.
Top 5 Concerns for Privacy Online:
Female
High concerns for financial information
was also reflected amongst Female
respondents, however Online Identity
Theft was similarly idenitifed as an
important cause for concern (4.83).
Interestingly Female respondents felt
more concern for Being asked too much
personal information (3.74) than Male
respondents (3.66).
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
43/83
42
4.7 Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns Model:
Measurement of Central Tendency & Dispersion
Table 2.0 represents respondents attitudes towards each construct (Control,
Collection & Awareness) of the IUIPC model; the Central Tendency was measured by
the Mean score for each statement. The Awareness construct especially reflected a
high level of agreement amongst the respondents. The Dispersion measured the
variation amongst the data set.
Constructs N Mean Std.
Deviation
Collection I am concerned when online sites collect personal
information about me113 4.14 0.60
I am concerned when online sites ask me for personal
information113 4.03 0.84
When online sites ask me for personal information, I
sometimes think twice before disclosing information113 3.90 0.94
I am concerned about giving my personal information to
many online sites 113 3.75 1.00
Control I believe it is important for online consumers to be able
to exercise some control over the use of disclosed
personal data
113 4.72 0.51
I believe that online privacy is invaded when control is
lost or unwillingly reduced as a result of a marketing
transaction
113 4.49 0.66
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
44/83
43
Constructs N Mean Std.
Deviatio
n
Control
(cont.)
I am concerned that if I disclose personal data online it
could be misused if I am not given an option to control it
113 3.89 1.21
Awareness A good consumer online privacy policy should have
clear and understandable disclosure practices113 4.56 0.50
It is very important to me that I am aware and
knowledgeable about how my personal information will
be used
113 4.52 0.57
Online sites seeking information online should disclose
the way the data are collected, processed and used113 4.32 0.62
Continued
Table 2.0
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
45/83
44
4.8 Internet Users Information Privacy Concerns Model:
Cross Tabulation by General Concerns for Privacy
Cross Tabulation is a useful technique applied to quantitative data in order to analyse
the relationship between two or more variables. The following tables represent an
analysis of the relationship between respondents general privacy concerns and the
key items taken from each of the Awareness and Control constructs of the IUIPC
model.
General concern for privacy online * I believe it is important for online consumers to be able to exercise
some control over the use of disclosed personal data Cross Tabulation
Count
I believe it is important for online consumers
to be able to exercise some control over the
use of disclosed personal data
TotalNeither
Disagree
nor Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Strongly
Agree
General concern for
privacy online
Slightly concerned2 9 4 15
Somewhat Concerned 1 13 35 49
Moderately Concerned0 4 32 36
Extremely Concerned0 0 13 13
Total 3 26 84 113
Cross Tabulation: General Concern for Privacy Online & The Importance of Theright to Control Disclosed Data
Table 2.1 reflects the relationship between respondents General concern for privacy
online and the highest ranked item in the Control construct I believe it is important
for online consumers to be able to exercise some control over the use of disclosed
personal data. 60% of those who were Slightly concerned for their online privacy
Somewhat agreed that it is important for consumers to have some right of control
over disclosed personal information. However, 71% of those who were Somewhat
Table 2.1
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
46/83
45
Table 2.2
Concerned and 89% of those who were Moderately Concerned Strongly agreed
with the importance of having some control over disclosed personal information;
expectedly, 100% of the Extremely Concerned respondents also Strongly agreed
with the statement.
How frequently have you personally been the victim of what you felt was an invasion of privacy (e.g.
receiving unsolicited phone calls, unsolicited emails, etc?) * It is very important to me that I am aware and
knowledgeable about how my personal information will be used Cross tabulation
Count
It is very important to me that I am aware andknowledgeable about how my personal information
will be used
Total
Neither Disagree
nor Agree
Somewhat
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Frequency of Privacy
Invasion
Never 1 2 0 3
Rarely 2 15 5 22
Occasionally 1 19 26 46
A moderate
amount0 7 20 27
A great deal 0 3 12 15
Total 4 46 63 113
Cross Tabulation: Frequency of Privacy Invasion & The Importance of Being
Made Aware of Disclosed Data Use
Table 2.2 represents the relationship between the frequencies of privacy invasions andthe importance of being made aware about the intended use of disclosed personal
data. 68% of those who have Rarely been the victim of some form of privacy invasion
Somewhat agreed that being made aware of how their personal information will be
used was important to them. In contrast to this, respondents who had more
experiences of privacy invasion felt strongly about the importance of being made
aware of the intended use of disclosed data. 57% of those who Occasionally
experience invasions of privacy Strongly agreed on the importance of being made
8/22/2019 Consumer Privacy Attitudes & Online Marketing
47/83
46
Table 3.0
aware; the same was also found for respondents that Moderately (74%) experienced
invasion of privacy and so too those who experienced A great deal (80%) of invasion.
4.9 Semi-Structured Interviews
Three semi-structured interviews were conducted and represented the Qualitative
phase of the research. The interviews were carried o
Recommended