IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dpr/wpaper/1238.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Paying to avoid the spotlight

Author

Listed:
  • Te Bao
  • John Duffy
  • Nobuyuki Hanaki

Abstract

In the digital age, privacy in economic activities is increasingly threatened. In considering policies to address this threat, it is useful to consider what value, if any, that people attach to privacy in economic activities. We study this question by eliciting individuals’ willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid detection in an economic experiment involving a coin-flipping task. We collect data from Japan, China, and the U.S.A. to examine whether there are cross-country differences. Our findings reveal that people’s WTP to “avoid the spotlight” is positive and economically sizable across all three countries and is the largest in Japan.

Suggested Citation

  • Te Bao & John Duffy & Nobuyuki Hanaki, 2024. "Paying to avoid the spotlight," ISER Discussion Paper 1238, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
  • Handle: RePEc:dpr:wpaper:1238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.osaka-u.ac.jp/library/dp/2024/DP1238.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beresford, Alastair R. & Kübler, Dorothea & Preibusch, Sören, 2012. "Unwillingness to pay for privacy: A field experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 25-27.
    2. Ahnert, Toni & Hoffmann, Peter & Monnet, Cyril, 2022. "The digital economy, privacy, and CBDC," CEPR Discussion Papers 17313, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Timothy N. Cason & Charles R. Plott, 2014. "Misconceptions and Game Form Recognition: Challenges to Theories of Revealed Preference and Framing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(6), pages 1235-1270.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schudy, Simeon & Utikal, Verena, 2017. "‘You must not know about me’—On the willingness to share personal data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1-13.
    2. Holm, Hakan J. & Samahita, Margaret, 2018. "Curating social image: Experimental evidence on the value of actions and selfies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 83-104.
    3. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    4. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    5. Thomas Buser & Huaiping Yuan, 2023. "Public Speaking Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2746-2760, May.
    6. Santiago Moreno-Bromberg & Luca Taschini, 2011. "Pollution permits, Strategic Trading and Dynamic Technology Adoption," Papers 1103.2914, arXiv.org.
    7. James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2018. "Incentives," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2018-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    8. Mechtenberg, Lydia & Münster, Johannes, 2012. "A strategic mediator who is biased in the same direction as the expert can improve information transmission," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 490-492.
    9. Alex Rees-Jones & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2018. "Taxing Humans: Pitfalls of the Mechanism Design Approach and Potential Resolutions," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 107-133.
    10. Anand, Kartik & Gai, Prasanna & Marsili, Matteo, 2012. "Rollover risk, network structure and systemic financial crises," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1088-1100.
    11. Stephan Stahlschmidt & Helmut Tausendteufel & Wolfgang K. Härdle, 2011. "Bayesian Networks and Sex-related Homicides," SFB 649 Discussion Papers SFB649DP2011-045, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
    12. Mammen, Enno & Rothe, Christoph & Schienle, Melanie, 2016. "Semiparametric Estimation With Generated Covariates," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(5), pages 1140-1177, October.
    13. Pablo Bra~nas-Garza & Antonio Cabrales & Mar'ia Paz Espinosa & Diego Jorrat, 2022. "The effect of ambiguity in strategic environments: an experiment," Papers 2209.11079, arXiv.org.
    14. Ward, Patrick S. & Gupta, Shweta & Singh, Vartika & Ortega, David L. & Gautam, Shriniwas, 2020. "What is the intrinsic value of fertilizer? Experimental value elicitation and decomposition in the hill and terai regions of Nepal," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    15. Fosgaard, Toke R. & Hansen, Lars Gårn & Wengström, Erik, 2014. "Understanding the nature of cooperation variability," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 134-143.
    16. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    17. Bull, Charles & Courty, Pascal & Doyon, Maurice & Rondeau, Daniel, 2019. "Failure of the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak mechanism in inexperienced subjects: New tests of the game form misconception hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 235-253.
    18. Lenka Fiala & Charles N. Noussair, 2017. "Charitable Giving, Emotions, And The Default Effect," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1792-1812, October.
    19. Samir Mamadehussene & Francesco Sguera, 2023. "On the Reliability of the BDM Mechanism," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 1166-1179, February.
    20. Bocart, Fabian Y.R.P. & Hafner, Christian M., 2012. "Econometric analysis of volatile art markets," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3091-3104.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dpr:wpaper:1238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Librarian (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isosujp.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.