IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v48y2024i7s0308596124000910.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is pay-or-consent for privacy justifiable? Evidence from different users' privacy attitudes toward behavioral data collection in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Nam, Sangjun
  • Kwon, Youngsun

Abstract

As regulators began prohibiting online platforms from collecting personal data based on the “take-it-or-leave-it” basis, platform firms must adopt more refined user consent rules such as the pay-or-consent approach. Ensuring sufficient user options could increase the welfare of privacy-sensitive users but reduce the efficiency of data-driven business models. To balance the benefits and costs of enhanced privacy protection, regulators should understand the diversity in users' attitudes toward behavioral data collection in free online platforms. Tradeoffs among privacy, conveniences, and free services based on users' heterogeneous preferences are considered to investigate the user's different privacy attitudes in free online platforms. Three distinct user groups were found: the first one reluctantly accepts the “take-it-or-leave-it” condition because of the lack of alternatives, the second one accepts it for free services, and the third one accepts it because it does not matter. These three user segments constituted 32.9%, 47.0%, and 20.1% of all the respondents, respectively. The pay-or-consent approach can be justifiable in terms of balancing the benefits and costs of the privacy regulations if it properly reflects privacy-sensitive users' willingness to pay for privacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Nam, Sangjun & Kwon, Youngsun, 2024. "Is pay-or-consent for privacy justifiable? Evidence from different users' privacy attitudes toward behavioral data collection in South Korea," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:7:s0308596124000910
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102794
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124000910
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102794?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bleier, Alexander & Eisenbeiss, Maik, 2015. "The Importance of Trust for Personalized Online Advertising," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 390-409.
    2. David Revelt and Kenneth Train., 2000. "Customer-Specific Taste Parameters and Mixed Logit: Households' Choice of Electricity Supplier," Economics Working Papers E00-274, University of California at Berkeley.
    3. Dimakopoulos, Philipp & Sudaric, Slobodan, 2018. "Privacy and Platform Competition," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 67, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    4. Avi Goldfarb & Catherine Tucker, 2012. "Privacy and Innovation," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 12, pages 65-89, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Savage, Scott J. & Waldman, Donald M., 2015. "Privacy tradeoffs in smartphone applications," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 171-175.
    6. Philipp K. Masur, 2020. "How Online Privacy Literacy Supports Self-Data Protection and Self-Determination in the Age of Information," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 258-269.
    7. Tamara Dinev & Massimo Bellotto & Paul Hart & Vincenzo Russo & Ilaria Serra & Christian Colautti, 2006. "Privacy calculus model in e-commerce – a study of Italy and the United States," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 389-402, August.
    8. Avi Goldfarb & Catherine E. Tucker, 2011. "Privacy Regulation and Online Advertising," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 57-71, January.
    9. A. G. Winegar & C. R. Sunstein, 2019. "How Much Is Data Privacy Worth? A Preliminary Investigation," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 425-440, September.
    10. Wang, Tien & Duong, Trong Danh & Chen, Charlie C., 2016. "Intention to disclose personal information via mobile applications: A privacy calculus perspective," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 531-542.
    11. Samuel G. Goldberg & Garrett A. Johnson & Scott K. Shriver, 2024. "Regulating Privacy Online: An Economic Evaluation of the GDPR," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 325-358, February.
    12. Hong Il Yoo, 2020. "lclogit2: An enhanced command to fit latent class conditional logit models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 20(2), pages 405-425, June.
    13. Avi Goldfarb & Verina F. Que, 2023. "The Economics of Digital Privacy," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 15(1), pages 267-286, September.
    14. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, January.
    15. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    16. Tesary Lin, 2022. "Valuing Intrinsic and Instrumental Preferences for Privacy," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(4), pages 663-681, July.
    17. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    18. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    19. Hayes, Jameson L. & Brinson, Nancy H. & Bott, Gregory J. & Moeller, Claire M., 2021. "The Influence of Consumer–Brand Relationship on the Personalized Advertising Privacy Calculus in Social Media," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 16-30.
    20. Tamara Dinev & Paul Hart, 2006. "An Extended Privacy Calculus Model for E-Commerce Transactions," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 61-80, March.
    21. David S. Evans, 2013. "Attention Rivalry Among Online Platforms," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(2), pages 313-357.
    22. Costa-Cabral, Francisco & Lynskey, Orla, 2017. "Family ties: the intersection between data protection and competition in EU Law," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68470, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    23. Alfnes, Frode & Wasenden, Ole Christian, 2022. "Your privacy for a discount? Exploring the willingness to share personal data for personalized offers," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7).
    24. Yao Li & Eugenia Ha Rim Rho & Alfred Kobsa, 2022. "Cultural differences in the effects of contextual factors and privacy concerns on users’ privacy decision on social networking sites," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 655-677, February.
    25. Aguirre, Elizabeth & Mahr, Dominik & Grewal, Dhruv & de Ruyter, Ko & Wetzels, Martin, 2015. "Unraveling the Personalization Paradox: The Effect of Information Collection and Trust-Building Strategies on Online Advertisement Effectiveness," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 34-49.
    26. Alison Munsch, 2021. "Millennial and generation Z digital marketing communication and advertising effectiveness: A qualitative exploration," Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 10-29, January.
    27. Alessandro Acquisti & Leslie K. John & George Loewenstein, 2013. "What Is Privacy Worth?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(2), pages 249-274.
    28. Tucker, Catherine E., 2012. "The economics of advertising and privacy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 326-329.
    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. Nam, Sangjun & Kwon, Youngsun, 2022. "Quantifying different psychological costs of user behavioral info for overcoming the 'take-it-or-leave-it' condition," 31st European Regional ITS Conference, Gothenburg 2022: Reining in Digital Platforms? Challenging monopolies, promoting competition and developing regulatory regimes 265662, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. H. Li & A. Nill, 2020. "Online Behavioral Targeting: Are Knowledgeable Consumers Willing to Sell Their Privacy?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 723-745, December.
    3. Bleier, Alexander & Goldfarb, Avi & Tucker, Catherine, 2020. "Consumer privacy and the future of data-based innovation and marketing," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 466-480.
    4. Caleb S. Fuller, 2019. "Is the market for digital privacy a failure?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 180(3), pages 353-381, September.
    5. Pallant, Jason I. & Pallant, Jessica L. & Sands, Sean J. & Ferraro, Carla R. & Afifi, Eslam, 2022. "When and how consumers are willing to exchange data with retailers: An exploratory segmentation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Katharina Baum & Olga Abramova & Stefan Meißner & Hanna Krasnova, 2023. "The effects of targeted political advertising on user privacy concerns and digital product acceptance: A preference-based approach," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-17, December.
    7. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    8. Michael Kummer & Patrick Schulte, 2019. "When Private Information Settles the Bill: Money and Privacy in Google’s Market for Smartphone Applications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3470-3494, August.
    9. Kelly D. Martin & Patrick E. Murphy, 2017. "The role of data privacy in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 135-155, March.
    10. Achtnicht, Martin, 2011. "Do environmental benefits matter? Evidence from a choice experiment among house owners in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2191-2200, September.
    11. Kesler, Reinhold & Kummer, Michael E. & Schulte, Patrick, 2019. "Competition and privacy in online markets: Evidence from the mobile app industry," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-064, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Hole, Arne Risa, 2008. "Modelling heterogeneity in patients' preferences for the attributes of a general practitioner appointment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 1078-1094, July.
    13. Sajeesh, S. & Singh, Ashutosh & Bhardwaj, Pradeep, 2022. "Optimal checkout strategies for online retailers," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 378-394.
    14. Potoglou, Dimitris & Palacios, Juan & Feijoo, Claudio & Gómez Barroso, Jose-Luis, 2015. "The supply of personal information: A study on the determinants of information provision in e-commerce scenarios," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127174, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    15. Carlos Barros, 2012. "Sustainable Tourism in Inhambane-Mozambique," CEsA Working Papers 105, CEsA - Centre for African and Development Studies.
    16. Yassine Lefouili & Leonardo Madio & Ying Lei Toh, 2024. "Privacy Regulation and Quality‐Enhancing Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 662-684, June.
    17. Johannes Geyer & Thorben Korfhage, 2015. "Long‐term Care Insurance and Carers' Labor Supply – A Structural Model," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1178-1191, September.
    18. Avi Goldfarb, 2014. "What is Different About Online Advertising?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 44(2), pages 115-129, March.
    19. Cecere, Grazia & Le Guel, Fabrice & Soulié, Nicolas, 2012. "Perceived Internet privacy concerns on social network in Europe," MPRA Paper 41437, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Nannan Kang & Erda Wang & Yang Yu, 2019. "Valuing forest park attributes by giving consideration to the tourist satisfaction," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(5), pages 711-733, August.

    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:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:7:s0308596124000910. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    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.