Rethinking the Trade-Off: A Systematic Review of Current Research on the Privacy Calculus Model
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52152/RCR.V14.6Keywords:
Privacy Calculus Model, Compatibility Principle, Four-Dimensional Framework, Privacy Concerns, Perceived BenefitsAbstract
As one of the most popular theoretical models explaining mechanisms of information disclosure behavior, the Privacy Calculus Model (PCM) has received significant academic interest and criticism. While numerous studies have offered explanations countering criticism of the privacy calculus model, none have synthesized existing findings on benefit and cost variables or systematically reviewed moderators and other factors to address the model's limitations. Drawing on the principle of compatibility and the Privacy Process Model's four-dimensional framework of privacy context, this study conducted a systematic review of 119 PCM studies published between 2018 and 2023. Results revealed that among studies reporting non-significant cost-disclosure relationships, 66% exhibited dimensional misalignment between cost and disclosure variables, compared to only 32% among studies with significant results. Additionally, we identified inconsistencies in how disclosure behaviors, perceived risks, and privacy concerns are conceptualized and operationalized, along with an underutilization of moderating variables. Based on these findings, we propose an integrated framework recommending that future PCM research align the dimensions of costs, benefits, and disclosure variables within their specific privacy contexts to improve predictive validity.
References
Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L., & Loewenstein, G. (2020). Secrets and likes: The drive for privacy and the difficulty of achieving it in the digital age. Journal of Consumer Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Consumer Psychology, 30(4), 736–758. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1191
Abramova, O., Wagner, A., Olt, C. M., & Buxmann, P. (2022). One for all, all for one: Social considerations in user acceptance of contact tracing apps using longitudinal evidence from Germany and Switzerland. International Journal of Information Management, 64, 102473.
Alkhalifah, A., & Bukar, U. A. (2022). Examining the prediction of COVID-19 contact-tracing app adoption using an integrated model and hybrid approach analysis. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 847184 .
Baek, Y. M., Kim, E.-M., & Bae, Y. (2014). My privacy is okay, but theirs is endangered: Why comparative optimism matters in online privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.010
Barth, S., & De Jong, M. D. T. (2017). The privacy paradox – Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior – A systematic literature review. Telematics and Informatics, 34(7), 1038–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.013
Bartol, J., Vehovar, V., & Petrovčič, A. (2023). Systematic review of survey scales measuring information privacy concerns on social network sites. Telematics and Informatics, 85, 102063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2023.102063
Baruh, L., Secinti, E., & Cemalcilar, Z. (2017). Online privacy concerns and privacy management: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Communication, 67(1), 26–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12276
Bazarova, N. N., & Masur, P. K. (2020). Towards an integration of individualistic, networked, and institutional approaches to online disclosure and privacy in a networked ecology. Current Opinion in Psychology, 36, 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.05.004
Ben-Ze’ev, A. (2003). Privacy, emotional closeness, and openness in cyberspace. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(4), 451–467.
Breuer, J., Weller, K., & Kinder-Kurlanda, K. (2023). The role of participants in online privacy research: Ethical and practical considerations. In The Routledge handbook of privacy and social media (pp. 314–323). Routledge.
Bol, N., & Antheunis, M. L. (2022). Skype or skip? Causes and consequences of intimate self-disclosure in computer-mediated doctor-patient communication. Media Psychology, 25(5), 706–723.
Burgoon, J. K. (2012). Privacy and communication. In Communication Yearbook 6 (pp. 206–249). Routledge.
Chatterjee, S., Chaudhuri, R., Vrontis, D., & Hussain, Z. (2023). Usage of smartphone for financial transactions: From the consumer privacy perspective. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 40(2), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1108/jcm-03-2021-4526
Chen, H.-T. (2018). Revisiting the privacy paradox on social media with an extended privacy calculus model: The effect of privacy concerns, privacy self-efficacy, and social capital on privacy management. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(10), 1392–1412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218792691
Chen, J. V., Biamukda, S., & Tran, S. T. T. (2020). Service providers’ intention to continue sharing: The moderating role of two-way review system. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(8), 1543–1564.
Choi, H., Park, J., & Jung, Y. (2018). The role of privacy fatigue in online privacy behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.001
Culnan, M. J., & Armstrong, P. K. (1999). Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organization Science, 10(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.1.104
De Wolf, R. (2020). Contextualizing how teens manage personal and interpersonal privacy on social media. New Media & Society, 22(6), 1058–1075. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819876570
Dienlin, T. (2014). The privacy process model. Medien und Privatheit, 105–122.
Dienlin, T., & Metzger, M. J. (2016). An extended privacy calculus model for SNSs: Analyzing self-disclosure and self-withdrawal in a representative U.S. sample. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(5), 368–383.
Dienlin, T. (2023). Privacy calculus. In The Routledge handbook of privacy and social media (pp. 70–79). Routledge.
Dinev, T., & Hart, P. (2006). An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Information Systems Research, 17(1), 61–80. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1060.0080
Dienlin, T., & Trepte, S. (2015). Is the privacy paradox a relic of the past? An in-depth analysis of privacy attitudes and privacy behaviors. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(3), 285–297.
Duan, S. X., & Deng, H. (2022). Exploring privacy paradox in contact tracing apps adoption. Internet Research, 32(5), 1725–1750. https://doi.org/10.1108/intr-03-2021-0160
Fernandes, T., & Pereira, N. (2021). Revisiting the privacy calculus: Why are consumers (really) willing to disclose personal data online? Telematics and Informatics, 65, 101717.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press.
Fox, G., Van Der Werff, L., Rosati, P., Takako Endo, P., & Lynn, T. (2022). Examining the determinants of acceptance and use of mobile contact tracing applications in Brazil: An extended privacy calculus perspective. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 73(7), 944–967.
Fox, G., Clohessy, T., Van der Werff, L., Rosati, P., & Lynn, T. (2021). Exploring the competing influences of privacy concerns and positive beliefs on citizen acceptance of contact tracing mobile applications. Computers in Human Behavior, 121, 106806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106806
Ganesan, S. (1994). Determinants of long-term orientation in buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 58(2), 1. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252265
Gerber, N., Gerber, P., & Volkamer, M. (2018). Explaining the privacy paradox: A systematic review of literature investigating privacy attitude and behavior. Computers & Security, 77, 226–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2018.04.002
Hong, S. J., & Cho, H. (2023). Privacy management and health information sharing via contact tracing during the COVID-19 pandemic: A hypothetical study on AI-based technologies. Health Communication, 38(5), 913–924.
Hu, T., Wang, K. Y., Chih, W., & Yang, X. H. (2020). Trade off cybersecurity concerns for co-created value. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 60(5), 468–483.
Ingber, A. S. (2026). Screenshots in human communication research: Protecting privacy in light of law, ethics and user expectations. New Media & Society, 14614448251413695.
Jiang, X., Goh, T.-T., & Liu, M. (2022). On students’ willingness to use online learning: A privacy calculus theory approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 880261. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.880261
Jozani, M., Ayaburi, E., Ko, M., & Choo, K. K. R. (2020). Privacy concerns and benefits of engagement with social media-enabled apps: A privacy calculus perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 106260.
Kamleitner, B., & Mitchell, V. (2019). Your data is my data: A framework for addressing interdependent privacy infringements. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 38(4), 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743915619858924
Kang, H., & Oh, J. (2023). Communication privacy management for smart speaker use: Integrating the role of privacy self-efficacy and the multidimensional view. New Media & Society, 25(5), 1153–1175. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211026611
Kehr, F., Kowatsch, T., Wentzel, D., & Fleisch, E. (2015). Blissfully ignorant: The effects of general privacy concerns, general institutional trust, and affect in the privacy calculus. Information Systems Journal, 25(6), 607–635. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12062
Kezer, M., Dienlin, T., & Baruh, L. (2022). Getting the privacy calculus right: Analyzing the relations between privacy concerns, expected benefits, and self-disclosure using response surface analysis. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 16(4).
Kim, B., & Kim, D. (2020). Understanding the key antecedents of users’ disclosing behaviors on social networking sites: The privacy paradox. Sustainability, 12(12), 5163.
Kim, D., Park, K., Park, Y., & Ahn, J.-H. (2019). Willingness to provide personal information: Perspective of privacy calculus in IoT services. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.022
Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers & Security, 64, 122–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002
Kolotylo-Kulkarni, M., Xia, W., & Dhillon, G. (2021). Information disclosure in e-commerce: A systematic review and agenda for future research. Journal of Business Research, 126, 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.006
Krasnova, H., Spiekermann, S., Koroleva, K., & Hildebrand, T. (2010). Online social networks: Why we disclose. Journal of Information Technology, 25(2), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2010.6
Lankton, N. K., McKnight, D. H., & Tripp, J. F. (2020). Understanding the antecedents and outcomes of Facebook privacy behaviors: An integrated model. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(3), 697–711. https://doi.org/10.1109/tem.2019.2893541
Laufer, R. S., & Wolfe, M. (1977). Privacy as a concept and a social issue: A multidimensional developmental theory. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01880.x
Lee, H., Park, H., & Kim, J. (2013). Why do people share their context information on social network services? A qualitative study and an experimental study on users’ behavior of balancing perceived benefit and risk. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 71(9), 862–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.01.005
Li, P., Cho, H., & Goh, Z. H. (2019). Unpacking the process of privacy management and self-disclosure from the perspectives of regulatory focus and privacy calculus. Telematics and Informatics, 41, 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2019.04.006
Lutz, C., Hoffmann, C. P., Bucher, E., & Fieseler, C. (2018). The role of privacy concerns in the sharing economy. Information, Communication & Society, 21(10), 1472–1492.
Ma, X., Qin, Y., Chen, Z., & Cho, H. (2021). Perceived ephemerality, privacy calculus, and the privacy settings of an ephemeral social media site. Computers in Human Behavior, 124, 106928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106928
Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Agarwal, J. (2004). Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4), 336–355. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1040.0032
Masur, P. K. (2023). Understanding the effects of conceptual and analytical choices on “finding” the privacy paradox: A specification curve analysis of large-scale survey data. Information, Communication & Society, 26(3), 584–602. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2021.1963460
Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133.
Miltgen, C. L., & Smith, H. J. (2019). Falsifying and withholding: Exploring individuals’ contextual privacy-related decision-making. Information & Management, 56(5), 696–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.11.004
Morando, F., Iemma, R., & Raiteri, E. (2014). Privacy evaluation: What empirical research on users’ valuation of personal data tells us. Internet Policy Review, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.14763/2014.2.283
Mwesiumo, D., Halpern, N., Budd, T., Suau-Sanchez, P., & Bråthen, S. (2021). An exploratory and confirmatory composite analysis of a scale for measuring privacy concerns. Journal of Business Research, 136, 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.07.027
Nabity-Grover, T., Cheung, C. M., & Thatcher, J. B. (2023). How COVID-19 stole Christmas: How the pandemic shifted the calculus around social media self-disclosures. Journal of Business Research, 154.
Nikkhah, H. R., & Sabherwal, R. (2022). Information disclosure willingness and mobile cloud computing collaboration apps: The impact of security and assurance mechanisms. Information Technology & People, 35(7), 1855–1883. https://doi.org/10.1108/itp-12-2019-0630
Nikkhah, H. R., Sabherwal, R., & Sarabadani, J. (2022). Mobile cloud computing apps and information disclosure: The moderating roles of dispositional and behaviour-based traits. Behaviour & Information Technology, 41(13), 2745–2761. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2021.1946591
Norberg, P. A., Horne, D. R., & Horne, D. A. (2007). The privacy paradox: Personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 41(1), 100–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00070.x
Nissenbaum, H. (2011). A contextual approach to privacy online. Daedalus, 140(4), 32–48.
Ostendorf, S., Meier, Y., & Brand, M. (2022). Self-disclosure on social networks: More than a rational decision-making process. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 16(4).
Paul, J., & Criado, A. R. (2020). The art of writing literature review: What do we know and what do we need to know? International Business Review, 29(4), 101717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101717
Peng, Z. (2023). A privacy calculus model perspective that explains why parents sharent. Information, Communication & Society, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2023.2285462
Pomfret, L., Previte, J., & Coote, L. (2020). Beyond concern: Socio-demographic and attitudinal influences on privacy and disclosure choices. Journal of Marketing Management, 36(5–6), 519–549. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257x.2020.1715465
Raynes-Goldie, K. (2010). Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: Understanding privacy in the age of Facebook. First Monday, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v15i1.2775
Sheeran, P. (2002). Intention–behavior relations: A conceptual and empirical review. European Review of Social Psychology, 12(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792772143000003
Shin, D., Kee, K. F., & Shin, E. Y. (2022). Algorithm awareness: Why user awareness is critical for personal privacy in the adoption of algorithmic platforms? International Journal of Information Management, 65, 102494.
Siahaan, M. N., Handayani, P. W., & Azzahro, F. (2022). Self-disclosure of social media users in Indonesia: The influence of personal and social media factors. Information Technology & People, 35(7), 1931–1954. https://doi.org/10.1108/itp-06-2020-0389
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Such, J. M., & Criado, N. (2018). Multiparty privacy in social media. Communications of the ACM, 61(8), 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1145/3208039
Sun, Y., Fang, S., & Hwang, Y. (2019). Investigating privacy and information disclosure behavior in social electronic commerce. Sustainability, 11(12), 3311.
Tang, Y., & Ning, X. (2023). Understanding user misrepresentation behavior on social apps: The perspective of privacy calculus theory. Decision Support Systems, 165, 113881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2022.113881
Tetlock, P. E., Lupia, A., McCubbins, M. D., & Popkin, S. L. (2000). Coping with trade-offs: Psychological constraints and political implications. In Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality (pp. 239–263).
Trang, S., & Weiger, W. H. (2021). The perils of gamification: Does engaging with gamified services increase users’ willingness to disclose personal information? Computers in Human Behavior, 116, 106644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106644
Trepte, S. (2023). The Routledge handbook of privacy and social media. Routledge.
Trepte, S. (2021). The social media privacy model: Privacy and communication in the light of social media affordances. Communication Theory, 31(4), 549–570. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtz035
Venkatesh, V., Hoehle, H., Aloysius, J. A., & Nikkhah, H. R. (2021). Being at the cutting edge of online shopping: Role of recommendations and discounts on privacy perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 121, 106785.
Wang, L., Hu, H.-H., Yan, J., & Mei, M. Q. (2019). Privacy calculus or heuristic cues? The dual process of privacy decision making on Chinese social media. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 33(2), 353–380. https://doi.org/10.1108/jeim-05-2019-0121
Wang, N., Zhang, B., Liu, B., & Jin, H. (2015). Investigating effects of control and ads awareness on android users’ privacy behaviors and perceptions. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services.
Warshaw, J., Matthews, T., Whittaker, S., Kau, C., Bengualid, M., & Smith, B. A. (2015). Can an algorithm know the “real you”? Understanding people's reactions to hyper-personal analytics systems. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 797–806).
Widmer, G., & Kubat, M. (1996). Learning in the presence of concept drift and hidden contexts. Machine Learning, 23(1), 69–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00116900
Willems, J., Schmid, M. J., Vanderelst, D., Vogel, D., & Ebinger, F. (2023). AI-driven public services and the privacy paradox: Do citizens really care about their privacy? Public Management Review, 25(11), 2116–2134.
Wottrich, V. M., Van Reijmersdal, E. A., & Smit, E. G. (2018). The privacy trade-off for mobile app downloads: The roles of app value, intrusiveness, and privacy concerns. Decision Support Systems, 106, 44–52.
Ying, S., Huang, Y., Qian, L., & Song, J. (2023). Privacy paradox for location tracking in mobile social networking apps: The perspectives of behavioral reasoning and regulatory focus. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 190, 122412.
Youn, S. (2005). Teenagers’ perceptions of online privacy and coping behaviors: A risk–benefit appraisal approach. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(1), 86–110. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4901_6
Young, A. L., & Quan-Haase, A. (2013). Privacy protection strategies on Facebook: The Internet privacy paradox revisited. Information, Communication & Society, 16.
Zhu, X., Cao, Q., & Liu, C. (2022). Mechanism of platform interaction on social media users’ intention to disclose privacy: A case study of TikTok app. Information (Basel), 13(10), 461. https://doi.org/10.3390/info13100461
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The philosophy of the journal is to be open and to make all articles accessible. It is our belief that open access is a must in the future of science.
Authors who publish with RCR accept a slightly modified Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
You, as author, retain the copyrights for your paper, but the Review of Communication Research is granted exclusivity for publication of the article. The agreement allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and publication in this journal. We do not want third parties to make a commercial use of the article, unless we agree it with authors.
The journal will run an open review process as well as a traditional peer review process.
When the manuscript is accepted for publication, it will get a doi number and get available online to facilitate early citation.
The journal will post the published article to many public repositories for further diffusion and permanence.
You, as author, are permitted and encouraged to post your work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on your website), as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
If you have any doubts, please, contact the editor: editor@rcommunication.org
Many thanks for submitting your work to this journal.
