PDF(1730 KB)
PDF(1730 KB)
PDF(1730 KB)
隐私侵犯经历对个人信息保护意愿的影响：基于“风险-收益”和调节定向的理论视角
The Effects of Privacy Violation Experience on the Intention to Protect Personal Information: Based on Risk-Benefit Framework and Regulatory Focus Theory
智媒时代，个人信息保护问题成为社会焦点议题。本研究以“风险-收益”框架为基础，重点考察了隐私侵犯经历对个人信息保护意愿的影响机制，并勾勒出不同群体（促进定向vs. 预防定向）的态度差异。通过对全国16城进行问卷调查（N = 4,800）发现：第一，隐私侵犯经历与个人信息保护意愿之间呈正U型曲线关系，即保护意愿随着隐私侵犯经历的增加出现先下降后上升两个阶段。第二，感知风险和感知收益均会发挥中介作用，在下降阶段，感知收益解释力更强，在上升阶段，感知风险解释力更强。第三，促进定向用户的个人信息保护意识强于预防定向用户，但在隐私侵犯极度严重时，预防定向用户的个人信息保护意识强于促进定向用户，在平衡风险和收益的过程中，预防定向用户拐点出现明显早于促进定向用户。研究结果为理解中国智媒用户的隐私实践提供理论支撑。
In the era of intelligent media, the issues of personal information protection has become a social focus. With a questionnaire survey (N = 4,800) conducted in 16 cities across China, this study outlines the differences in attitudes towards personal information protection among different groups of users (promotion focus vs. prevention focus), and clarifies the mechanism of privacy invasion experience on the intention to protect personal information. The findings of this study are as follows: First, there is a positive U-shaped relationship between the experience of privacy invasion and the intention to protect personal information, and regulatory focus plays a moderating role in this relationship. Second, both perceived risk and perceived benefit could mediate this effect, specifically, perceived benefit and perceived risk have a strong explanatory power in the declining stage and in the rising stage, respectively. Third, the awareness of personal information protection of the promotion-focused individuals is stronger than that of the prevention-focused individuals, however, when the level of privacy invasion is extremely high, the awareness of personal information protection of the prevention-focused individuals is stronger than that of the promotion-focused individuals. In the process of balancing risks and benefits, the turning point of the prevention-focused users appears obviously earlier than the promotion-focused users. These research results provide theoretical supports for understanding the privacy practices of Chinese intellectual media users.
个人信息保护意愿 / 隐私侵犯经历 / 调节定向 / “风险-收益”框架 / 智能媒体
intention to protect personal information / experience of privacy invasion / regulatory focus / “risk-benefit” framework / intelligent media
| [1] |
陈甦(主编)(2017). 《民法总则评注(下册)》. 北京: 法律出版社.
|
| [2] |
程慧平, 闻心玥, 苏超(2020). 社交媒体用户隐私披露意愿影响因素模型及实证研究. 《图书情报工作》,(16),92-104.
|
| [3] |
程啸(2020). 论我国民法典中个人信息权益的性质. 《政治与法律》,(8),2-14.
|
| [4] |
董颖, 许正良, 徐东溟(2016). 消费者网络口碑推荐意愿提升策略研究——基于心理调节定向视角. 《情报科学》,(6),151-154.
|
| [5] |
范为(2016). 大数据时代个人信息保护的路径重构. 《环球法律评论》,(5),92-115.
|
| [6] |
郭海玲, 马红雨, 许泽辉(2019). 社会化媒体用户信息披露意愿影响模型构建与实证——以微信用户为例. 《图书情报工作》,(15),111-120.
|
| [7] |
韩啸, 谈津(2022). 隐私悖论是否存在?对隐私关注与隐私行为关系的荟萃分析. 《信息资源管理学报》,(2),101-111.
|
| [8] |
奇安信行业安全研究中心(2021). 2021年APP个人信息使用态势分析报告.检索于 https://www.qianxin.com/threat/reportdetail?report_id=131.
|
| [9] |
孙锐, 罗映宇(2021). 自我知觉理论视角下消费者隐私悖论行为研究:ERPs的证据. 《南开管理评论》,(4),153-160.
|
| [10] |
王乐, 王璐瑶, 孙早(2020). 隐私侵犯经历对网络用户自我披露的影响机制. 《系统工程理论与实践》,(1),79-92.
|
| [11] |
杨彪(2015). 信息治理与社会歧视——中国隐私立法的策略与实践. 《社会学研究》,(6),26-48.
|
| [12] |
姚琦, 乐国安, 伍承聪, 李燕飞, 陈晨(2008). 调节定向的测量维度及其问卷的信度和效度检验. 《应用心理学》,(4),318-323.
|
| [13] |
尹非凡, 王詠(2013). 消费行为领域中的调节定向. 《心理科学进展》,(2),347-357.
|
| [14] |
张晓娟, 李贞贞(2017). 基于社会认知理论的智能手机用户信息安全行为意愿研究. 《现代情报》,(9),16-22.
|
| [15] |
朱鹏, 李璐,加里·马尔基奥尼(2019). 基于调节定向理论的社交网络用户信息分享行为研究. 《情报学报》,(3),257-265.
|
| [16] |
|
| [17] |
|
| [18] |
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
Studies that combine moderation and mediation are prevalent in basic and applied psychology research. Typically, these studies are framed in terms of moderated mediation or mediated moderation, both of which involve similar analytical approaches. Unfortunately, these approaches have important shortcomings that conceal the nature of the moderated and the mediated effects under investigation. This article presents a general analytical framework for combining moderation and mediation that integrates moderated regression analysis and path analysis. This framework clarifies how moderator variables influence the paths that constitute the direct, indirect, and total effects of mediated models. The authors empirically illustrate this framework and give step-by-step instructions for estimation and interpretation. They summarize the advantages of their framework over current approaches, explain how it subsumes moderated mediation and mediated moderation, and describe how it can accommodate additional moderator and mediator variables, curvilinear relationships, and structural equation models with latent variables.(c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved.
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
Motivational factors receive little attention in current theories of the placebo effect. Reasons for this position are reviewed, and an argument is made for reconsidering the influence of motivation on the placebo effect. The authors hypothesize that nonconscious goals alter reactions to a placebo expectation. Specifically, the authors predict that the placebo effect is most likely to occur when individuals have a goal that can be fulfilled by confirmation of the placebo expectation. The authors tested this notion in 5 experiments. The results demonstrate the role of motivation in the placebo effect across a variety of symptom domains and via 4 different goal activation techniques. Moreover, this moderating effect occurred for both positive and negative placebo expectations, across different placebo effect measures, and in brief laboratory experiments as well as in lengthier studies. It is argued that theories regarding the placebo effect should incorporate motivational factors.2005 APA, all rights reserved
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
The purpose of this paper is to propose a theory of information security intelligence and examine the effects of managers’ information security intelligence (MISI) on employees’ procedural countermeasure awareness and information security policy (ISP) compliance intention.
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
This research demonstrates that people's goals associated with regulatory focus moderate the effect of message framing on persuasion. The results of 6 experiments show that appeals presented in gain frames are more persuasive when the message is promotion focused, whereas loss-framed appeals are more persuasive when the message is prevention focused. These regulatory focus effects suggesting heightened vigilance against negative outcomes and heightened eagerness toward positive outcomes are replicated when perceived risk is manipulated. Enhanced processing fluency leading to more favorable evaluations in conditions of compatibility appears to underlie these effects. The findings underscore the regulatory fit principle that accounts for the persuasiveness of message framing effects and highlight how processing fluency may contribute to the "feeling right" experience when the strategy of goal pursuit matches one's goal.
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
|
| [35] |
Privacy seals were developed to address concerns about online privacy. However, seals are widely misinterpreted by consumers as privacy protection. This research assessed how well privacy policies matched the standards promised by the seal authorities and compared the privacy protection practices of participating and non-participating sites. Privacy policy statements were interpreted as a form of persuasive communication that attempts to minimize the risks of providing personal information while emphasizing the benefits of personal disclosure. There were few differences in the privacy practices between seal authorities: TRUSTe and BBBOnLine participants offered about the same degree of privacy protection assurances and they were equal with regard to the amount or depth of personal information they requested. Notably, unsealed sites offered nearly equal privacy assurances and made fewer personal information requests than the sealed sites. However, seal program participants did provide superior access to information and assurances of data security.
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
Consumers’ personal information often informs retailers’ marketing efforts in terms of creating value in the online marketplace. This study examines four factors related to consumers’ social media engagement and online privacy protection behaviors. Regulatory focus, social exchange, and marketing relationship theories explain the online consumer personal information share-and-protect model developed. Consumers aged 18–64 years across the United States participated in this survey research. The results suggest that while personal privacy violation experience and perceived secondary control of one's personal information are influential antecedents, privacy concerns and trust in social media websites mediate each of these respectively. The findings suggest that promotion- and prevention-related behaviors regarding personal information align with the orientation of the antecedents, indicating that regulatory focus theory shows promise for examining the privacy paradox. We conclude by developing a matrix that integrates regulatory focus and social exchange theories to guide future research.
|
| [39] |
|
| [40] |
|
| [41] |
|
| [42] |
|
| [43] |
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
Schwartz,
|
| [47] |
|
| [48] |
|
| [49] |
Prevention-focused individuals are motivated to maintain the status quo. Given this, we predicted that individuals with a strong prevention focus, either as a chronic predisposition or situationally induced, would treat their initial decision on how to behave on a first task as the status quo and would thus be motivated to repeat that decision on a subsequent task-even for decisions that were ethically questionable. Results from five studies supported this prediction in multiple ethical domains: whether or not to overstate performance (Studies 1, 2a, and 2b), whether or not to disclose disadvantageous facts (Study 3), and whether or not to pledge a donation (Study 4). The prevention-repetition effect was observed both when the initial and subsequent decisions were in the same domain (Studies 1-3) and when they were in different domains (Study 4). Alternative accounts for this effect, such as justification for the initial decision and preference for consistency, were ruled out (Study 2b).
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
