IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v43y2024i2p440-461.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When the Data Are Out: Measuring Behavioral Changes Following a Data Breach

Author

Listed:
  • Dana Turjeman

    (Arison School of Business, Reichman University, Herzliya 4610101, Israel)

  • Fred M. Feinberg

    (Ross School of Business and Department of Statistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109)

Abstract

As the quantity and value of data increase, so do the severity of data breaches and customer privacy invasions. Although firms typically publicize their post hoc protective actions, little is known about the aftereffects of major breaches on users’ behaviors; do they alter their interactions with the firm, continue “business as usual,” or do something more subtle? We explore these questions in the context of a severe data breach to a matchmaking website for those seeking an (extramarital) affair. A challenge to measuring “treatment effects” for a massive and highly publicized breach is the lack of an obvious control group. To resolve this problem, we propose Temporal Causal Inference (TCI); each group of users who joined during a given time window is matched with an appropriate (control) group of users who had joined prior to it, helping to account for “usage trajectories” in both individual and temporal site behavior. Following the creation of the control groups, we adapt Causal Forests ( Athey et al. 2019 ) into Temporal Causal Forests (TCF). TCF allows for insights regarding both average and individual-level treatment (data breach) effects as well as both demographic and usage-based covariates that align with them. Our analyses reveal a decrease in the probability of searching and messaging on the website and a notable increase in the probability of deleting photos, the primary avenue for avoiding further personal identification. Moreover, these effects are broadly robust to a variety of causal inference methodologies, both with and without TCI or Causal Forests. Intriguingly, these initially negative reaction(s) did not persist; by the third week after the announcement, there were hints of “life returns to normal.” Despite the specificity of the setting, our analysis suggests both managerial and policy imperatives to help protect customers’ privacy.

Suggested Citation

  • Dana Turjeman & Fred M. Feinberg, 2024. "When the Data Are Out: Measuring Behavioral Changes Following a Data Breach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 440-461, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:43:y:2024:i:2:p:440-461
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.2019.0208
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2019.0208
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.2019.0208?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sebastian Calonico & Matias D. Cattaneo & Max H. Farrell & Rocío Titiunik, 2019. "Regression Discontinuity Designs Using Covariates," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(3), pages 442-451, July.
    2. Michael C Knaus & Michael Lechner & Anthony Strittmatter, 2021. "Machine learning estimation of heterogeneous causal effects: Empirical Monte Carlo evidence," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 134-161.
    3. Stefan Wager & Susan Athey, 2018. "Estimation and Inference of Heterogeneous Treatment Effects using Random Forests," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 113(523), pages 1228-1242, July.
    4. Rosati, Pierangelo & Cummins, Mark & Deeney, Peter & Gogolin, Fabian & van der Werff, Lisa & Lynn, Theo, 2017. "The effect of data breach announcements beyond the stock price: Empirical evidence on market activity," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 146-154.
    5. Aurélie Lemmens & Sunil Gupta, 2020. "Managing Churn to Maximize Profits," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 956-973, September.
    6. Ning Zhong & David A. Schweidel, 2020. "Capturing Changes in Social Media Content: A Multiple Latent Changepoint Topic Model," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 827-846, July.
    7. Alessandro Acquisti & Hal R. Varian, 2005. "Conditioning Prices on Purchase History," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 367-381, May.
    8. Xu, Yiqing, 2017. "Generalized Synthetic Control Method: Causal Inference with Interactive Fixed Effects Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 57-76, January.
    9. Donald B. Rubin, 2005. "Causal Inference Using Potential Outcomes: Design, Modeling, Decisions," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 322-331, March.
    10. Sasha Romanosky & Rahul Telang & Alessandro Acquisti, 2011. "Do data breach disclosure laws reduce identity theft?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 256-286, March.
    11. Tesary Lin, 2022. "Valuing Intrinsic and Instrumental Preferences for Privacy," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(4), pages 663-681, July.
    12. Jung Ah Han & Elea McDonnell Feit & Shuba Srinivasan, 2020. "Can negative buzz increase awareness and purchase intent?," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 89-104, March.
    13. Curtis R. Taylor, 2004. "Consumer Privacy and the Market for Customer Information," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 631-650, Winter.
    14. Sebastian Calonico & Matias D. Cattaneo & Max H. Farrell & Roc ́ıo Titiunik, 2017. "rdrobust: Software for regression-discontinuity designs," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 17(2), pages 372-404, June.
    15. Eli Amir & Shai Levi & Tsafrir Livne, 2018. "Do firms underreport information on cyber-attacks? Evidence from capital markets," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 1177-1206, September.
    16. Susan Athey & Christian Catalini & Catherine Tucker, 2017. "The Digital Privacy Paradox: Small Money, Small Costs, Small Talk," NBER Working Papers 23488, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Avi Goldfarb & Catherine Tucker, 2012. "Shifts in Privacy Concerns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 349-353, May.
    18. Fader, Peter S. & Hardie, Bruce G.S., 2009. "Probability Models for Customer-Base Analysis," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 61-69.
    19. Hsiangting Shatina Chen & Tun-Min (Catherine) Jai, 2021. "Trust fall: data breach perceptions from loyalty and non-loyalty customers," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(13-14), pages 947-963, October.
    20. Kathleen Cleeren & Marnik G. Dekimpe & Harald J. Heerde, 2017. "Marketing research on product-harm crises: a review, managerial implications, and an agenda for future research," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 593-615, September.
    21. Vira Semenova & Victor Chernozhukov, 2021. "Debiased machine learning of conditional average treatment effects and other causal functions," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(2), pages 264-289.
    22. Chatterjee, Subimal & Gao, Xiang & Sarkar, Sumantra & Uzmanoglu, Cihan, 2019. "Reacting to the scope of a data breach: The differential role of fear and anger," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 183-193.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Patrick Rehill, 2024. "How do applied researchers use the Causal Forest? A methodological review of a method," Papers 2404.13356, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2024.

    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. Long Chen & Yadong Huang & Shumiao Ouyang & Wei Xiong, 2021. "The Data Privacy Paradox and Digital Demand," Working Papers 2021-47, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    2. Daron Acemoglu & Ali Makhdoumi & Azarakhsh Malekian & Asu Ozdaglar, 2022. "Too Much Data: Prices and Inefficiencies in Data Markets," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 218-256, November.
    3. Jin, Ginger Zhe & Wagman, Liad, 2021. "Big data at the crossroads of antitrust and consumer protection," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    4. 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).
    5. Davide Viviano & Jelena Bradic, 2019. "Synthetic learner: model-free inference on treatments over time," Papers 1904.01490, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    6. Dengler, Sebastian & Prüfer, Jens, 2021. "Consumers' privacy choices in the era of big data," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 499-520.
    7. Daniel Goller, 2023. "Analysing a built-in advantage in asymmetric darts contests using causal machine learning," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(1), pages 649-679, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Jiadong Gu, 2024. "Data Trade and Consumer Privacy," Papers 2406.12457, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    10. Clavorà Braulin, Francesco, 2021. "The effects of personal information on competition: Consumer privacy and partial price discrimination," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-007, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Cockx, Bart & Lechner, Michael & Bollens, Joost, 2023. "Priority to unemployed immigrants? A causal machine learning evaluation of training in Belgium," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    12. Jeffrey T. Prince & Scott Wallsten, 2022. "How much is privacy worth around the world and across platforms?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 841-861, November.
    13. Phillip Heiler & Michael C. Knaus, 2021. "Effect or Treatment Heterogeneity? Policy Evaluation with Aggregated and Disaggregated Treatments," Papers 2110.01427, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    14. Rodrigo Montes & Wilfried Sand-Zantman & Tommaso Valletti, 2019. "The Value of Personal Information in Online Markets with Endogenous Privacy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1342-1362, March.
    15. Prüfer, Jens, 2018. "Trusting privacy in the cloud," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 52-67.
    16. Ganesh Karapakula, 2023. "Stable Probability Weighting: Large-Sample and Finite-Sample Estimation and Inference Methods for Heterogeneous Causal Effects of Multivalued Treatments Under Limited Overlap," Papers 2301.05703, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    17. Florian Morath & Johannes Münster, 2018. "Online Shopping and Platform Design with Ex Ante Registration Requirements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 360-380, January.
    18. Jeanine Miklós-Thal & Avi Goldfarb & Avery Haviv & Catherine Tucker, 2024. "Frontiers: Digital Hermits," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 697-708, July.
    19. Ginger Zhe Jin, 2018. "Artificial Intelligence and Consumer Privacy," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, pages 439-462, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Michael R. Baye & David E. M. Sappington, 2020. "Revealing transactions data to third parties: Implications of privacy regimes for welfare in online markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 260-275, April.

    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:inm:ormksc:v:43:y:2024:i:2:p:440-461. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.