The Models of Applying Online Privacy Literacy Strategies: A Case Study of Instagram Girl Users

Bicharanlou, Abdollah; Siasi Rad, Seyedeh Farzaneh

doi:10.22631/jicr.2017.1534.2230

Document Type : Scientific Research Manuscript

Authors

¹ social communication sciences, social sciences faculty, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

² Social Communication, social sciences faculty, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22631/jicr.2017.1534.2230

Abstract

Social networks affect remarkably in the lives of virtual space users. These networks like most human relations involve compromising between self-disclosure and privacy protection. A process which is realized through improving privacy and empowering the user at the personal level. This study aimed to assess strategies based on online privacy literacy. In particular, strategies that Instagram young girls users should employ to achieve the optimum level of privacy. For this purpose, firstly the paradox of privacy, benefits and risks of self-disclosure are explained, then according to online privacy literacy, some social and technological strategies are introduced by which users can solve the “paradox of privacy.” In the result section, after describing the main benefits and risks of self-disclosure by girl users, the current models of using these social and technological strategies to solve the mentioned paradox are discussed. The research method is ethnography based on non-collaborative observation of Instagram pages and semi-structured interviews with 20 girl users of social networks.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Communication- Cyberspace

References

Acquisti, A., & Grossklags, J. (2005). Privacy and rationality in individual decision making. IEEE Security & Privacy, 3(1), 24-30. doi: 10.1109/MSP.2005.22

Altman, I. (1977). Privacy regulation: Culturally universal or culturally specific?. Journal of Social Issues, 33(3), 66-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01883.x

Barnes, S. B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9). doi: 10.5210/fm.v11i9.1394

Bartsch, M., & Dienlin, T. (2016). Control your Facebook: An analysis of online privacy literacy. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 147-154. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.022

Bawden, D. (2008). Origins and concepts of digital literacy. In C. Lankshear, & M. Knobel, Digital Literacies:Concepts, Policies and Practices (pp. 17-32), New York: Peter Lang.

Ben-Ze’ev, A. (2003). Privacy, emotional closeness, and openness in cyberspace. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(4), 451–467. doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00078-X

Berg, J. H., & Derlega, V. J. (1987). Themes in the study of self-disclosure. In V. J. Derlega, & J. H. Berg, Self-Disclosure: Theory, Research, and Therapy (pp. 1-8), New York: Plenum Press.

Boyd, D., & Hargittai, E. (2010). Facebook privacy settings: Who cares?. First Monday, 15(8). doi: 10.5210/fm.v15i8.3086

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Burgess, R. G. (1981). Keeping a research diary. Cambridge Journal of Education, 11(1), 75-83. doi: 10.1080/0305764810110106

Derlega, V. J., Winstead, B. A., & Greene, K. (2008). Self-disclosure and starting a close relationship. In S. Sprecher, A. Wenzel, & J. Harvey, (Eds.). Handbook of Relationship Initiation (pp. 153–174), New York: Psychology Press.

Ellison, N. B., Vitak, J., Steinfield, C., Gray, R., & Lampe, C. (2011). Negotiating privacy concerns and social capital needs in a social media environment. In S. Trepte, & L. Reinecke, Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web (pp. 19-32), Berlin: Springer.

Eshet-Alkali, Y., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2004). Experiments in digital literacy. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(4), 421-429. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2004.7.421

Flick, U. (2008). Darāmadi bar tahqiq-e keyfi [An introduction to qualitative research] (H. Jalili, Trans.). Tehran, Iran: Našr-e Ney. (Original work published 2006)

Fogel, J., & Nehmad, E. (2009). Internet social network communities: Risk taking, trust, and privacy concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 153-160. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.08.006

Gattiker, U. E., Perlusz, S., Bohmann, K., & Sørensen, C. M. (2001). The virtual community: Building on social structure, relations and trust to achieve value. In L. Chidambaram, & I. Zigurs, Our Virtual World: The Transformation of Work, Play and Life via Technology (pp. 165-187), Hershey; USA & London; Uk: Idea Group Publishing.

Hall, G. (2008). An ethnographic diary study. ELT Journal, 62(2), 113-122. doi: 10.1093/elt/ccm088

Hallett, R. E., & Barber, K. (2013). Ethnographic research in a cyber era. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 43(3), 306-330. doi: 10.1177/0891241613497749

Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills.First Monday, 7(4). doi: 10.5210/fm.v7i4.942

Hill, C. T., & Stull, D. E. (1987). Gender and self-disclosure: Strategies for exploring the issues. In V. J. Derlega, & J. H. Berg, Self-Disclosure: Theory, Research, and Therapy (pp. 81-100), New York: Plenum Press.

Hu, Y., Manikonda, L., & Kambhampati, S. (2014). What we Instagram: A First analysis of Instagram photo content and user types. Paper be Peresented at The 8th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, June 1-4, 2014, USA, Michigan. Retrived from https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM14/paper/viewFile/8118/8087

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. Human-Computer Studies, 71, 862–877. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.01.005

Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., & Christakis, N. (2008). The taste for privacy: An analysis of college student privacy settings in an online social network. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 14(1), 79-100. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.01432.x

Li, Y. (2012). Theories in online information privacy research: A critical review and an integrated framework. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 471-481. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2012.06.010

Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2009). Ravešhā-ye tahqiq-e keyfi dar olum-e ertebātāt [Qualitative communication research methods] (A. Guivian, Trans). Tehran, Iran: Hamšahri. (Original work published in 2002)

Litt, E. (2013). Understanding social network site users’ privacy tool use. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1649–1656. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2012.06.010

Markham, T., & Couldry, N. (2007). Tracking the reflexivity of the (Dis) Engaged citizen some methodological reflections. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(5), 675-695. doi: 10.1177/1077800407301182

Omarzu, J. (2000). A disclosure decision model: Determining how and when individuals will self-disclose. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2), 174-185. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0402_05

Park, Y. J. (2011). Digital literacy and privacy behavior online. Communication Research, 1-22. doi: 10.1177/0093650211418338

Park, Y. J. (2015). Do men and women differ in privacy? Gendered privacy and (in) equality in the internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 252-258. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.011

Petronio, S. (2002). Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure. New York: State University of New York Press.

Price, B. A., Adam, K., & Nuseibeh, B. (2005). Keeping ubiquitous computing to yourself: A practical model for user control of privacy. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63(1), 228-253. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.008

Stutzman, F., Vitak, J., Ellison, N. B., Gray, R., & Lampe, C. (2012). Privacy in interaction: Exploring disclosure and social capital in Facebook. Paper Peresented at the Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, June 4-8, 2012, Dublin, Irland. Retrived from https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM12/paper/viewFile/4666/5000

Taddicken, M. (2012). Privacy, surveillance, and self-disclosure in the social web. In C. Fuchs, K. Boersma, A. Albrechtslund, & M. Sandoval, (Eds.). Internet and Surveillance: The Challenges of Web 2.0 and Social Media (pp. 255-272), New York: Routledge Publication.

Thelwall, M. (2011). Privacy and gender in the social web. In S. Trepte, & L. Reinecke, Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web (pp. 251-265), Berlin: Springer.

Trepte, S., Teutsch, D., Masur, P. K., Eicher, C., Fischer, M., Hennhöfer, A., & Lind, F. (2014). Do people know about privacy and data protection strategies? Towards the “Online Privacy Literacy Scale” (OPLIS). In S. Gutwirth, R. Leenes, & P. D. Hert, Reforming European Data Protection Law (pp. 333-365), Netherlands: Springer.

Tufekci, Z. (2008). Can you see me now? Audience and disclosure regulation in online social network sites. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 28(1), 20-36.

Yao, M. Z. (2011). Self-protection of online privacy: A behavioral approach. In S. Trepte, & L. Reinecke, Privacy Online: Perspectives on Privacy and Self-Disclosure in the Social Web (pp. 111-125), Berlin: Springer.

HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:

Siasirad, F., & Bicharanlou, A. (2017). The models of applying online privacy literacy strategies; A case study of Instagram girl users. Journal of Iran Cultural Research, 10(3), 125-151. doi: 10.22631/JICR.2017.1534.2230

Name *

Email Address *

Affiliation *

Comments *

Security Code *

Journal of Iranian Cultural Research

The Models of Applying Online Privacy Literacy Strategies: A Case Study of Instagram Girl Users

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 10, Issue 3 - Serial Number 39
November 2017
Pages 125-151

The Models of Applying Online Privacy Literacy Strategies: A Case Study of Instagram Girl Users

References

References

Send comment about this article

Volume 10, Issue 3 - Serial Number 39November 2017Pages 125-151

Volume 10, Issue 3 - Serial Number 39
November 2017
Pages 125-151