IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/doi10.1086-689933.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Privacy Policy Language Irrelevant to Consumers?

Author

Listed:
  • Lior Jacob Strahilevitz
  • Matthew B. Kugler

Abstract

This article reports the results of two experiments in which large, census-weighted samples of Americans read short excerpts from Facebook's, Yahoo's, and Google's privacy policies, which are at issue in high-stakes privacy class-action lawsuits. Subjects were randomly assigned to read language from either vague policies, some of which had been adjudicated insufficient to notify consumers about the companies' practices, or explicit policies. Though many experimental subjects read these privacy policy excerpts closely, subjects who saw the explicit policies did not differ from those who saw vague policies in their assessment of whether their assent to the policies would permit the corporate practices at issue. Subjects generally stated that agreement to either vague or explicit language authorized companies to collect or use their personal information, even though consumers regarded these corporate practices as intrusive. These experiments show that courts and laypeople can understand the same privacy policy language quite differently.

Suggested Citation

  • Lior Jacob Strahilevitz & Matthew B. Kugler, 2016. "Is Privacy Policy Language Irrelevant to Consumers?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(S2), pages 69-95.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/689933
    DOI: 10.1086/689933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/689933
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/689933
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/689933?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. Dou, Wenyu, 2004. "Will Internet Users Pay for Online Content?," Journal of Advertising Research, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(4), pages 349-359, December.
    2. Florencia Marotta-Wurgler, 2011. "Some Realities of Online Contracting," Supreme Court Economic Review, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 11-23.
    3. 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.
    4. Zev J. Eigen, 2012. "Experimental Evidence of the Relationship between Reading the Fine Print and Performance of Form-Contract Terms," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 168(1), pages 124-141, March.
    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. Jo-Ann Pattinson & Haibo Chen & Subhajit Basu, 2020. "Legal issues in automated vehicles: critically considering the potential role of consent and interactive digital interfaces," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Omri Ben-Shahar & Lior Jacob Strahilevitz, 2016. "Contracting over Privacy: Introduction," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(S2), pages 1-11.
    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. Gregor Dorfleitner & Lars Hornuf & Julia Kreppmeier, 2023. "Promise not fulfilled: FinTech, data privacy, and the GDPR," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-29, December.
    5. Gregor Dorfleitner & Lars Hornuf & Julia Kreppmeier, 2021. "Promise not Fulfilled: FinTech Data Privacy, and the GDPR," CESifo Working Paper Series 9359, CESifo.

    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. Jorge Padilla, 2020. "Big Tech “banks”, financial stability and regulation," Revista de Estabilidad Financiera, Banco de España, issue Spring.
    2. Long Chen & Yadong Huang & Shumiao Ouyang & Wei Xiong, 2021. "The Data Privacy Paradox and Digital Demand," Working Papers 2021-47, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    3. Nguyen Thuy Quynh Loan & Tran Vu Hoang Long, 2017. "Factors influencing the willingness-to-pay of internet users in Vietnam for the fee-based online contents," HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF SCIENCE - ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF SCIENCE, HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY, vol. 7(2), pages 24-41.
    4. Monica C. LaBarge & Kristen L. Walker & Courtney Nations Azzari & Maureen Bourassa & Jesse Catlin & Stacey Finkelstein & Alexei Gloukhovtsev & James Leonhardt & Kelly Martin & Maria Rejowicz‐Quaid & M, 2022. "Digital exchange compromises: Teetering priorities of consumers and organizations at the iron triangle," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 1220-1243, September.
    5. Caleb S. Fuller, 2019. "Is the market for digital privacy a failure?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 180(3), pages 353-381, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Carlo Pugnetti & Sandra Elmer, 2020. "Self-Assessment of Driving Style and the Willingness to Share Personal Information," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, March.
    8. Frank Ebbers & Jan Zibuschka & Christian Zimmermann & Oliver Hinz, 2021. "User preferences for privacy features in digital assistants," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(2), pages 411-426, June.
    9. Idris Adjerid & Alessandro Acquisti & George Loewenstein, 2019. "Choice Architecture, Framing, and Cascaded Privacy Choices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2267-2290, May.
    10. Marine Le Gall-Ely, 2009. "Définition, mesure et déterminants du consentement à payer du consommateur : synthèse critique et voies de recherche," Post-Print hal-00522826, HAL.
    11. Jan Krämer & Lukas Wiewiorra, 2012. "Network Neutrality and Congestion Sensitive Content Providers: Implications for Content Variety, Broadband Investment, and Regulation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1303-1321, December.
    12. Henning Hermes & Philipp Lergetporer & Frauke Peter & Simon Wiederhold, 2021. "Application Barriers and the Socioeconomic Gap in Child Care Enrollment," CESifo Working Paper Series 9282, CESifo.
    13. Andrzej Nałęcz, 2018. "Empowering the 'Unempowerable'. Behavioural Insights into Informing Consumers about Internet Access Services in the European Union under Regulation 2015/2120," Post-Print hal-01991747, HAL.
    14. Bitterly, T. Bradford & Schweitzer, Maurice E., 2019. "The impression management benefits of humorous self-disclosures: How humor influences perceptions of veracity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 73-89.
    15. 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.
    16. Frik, Alisa & Gaudeul, Alexia, 2018. "An experimental method for the elicitation of implicit attitudes to privacy risk," MPRA Paper 87845, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Mª Victoria Bordonaba-Juste & Laura Lucia-Palacios & Raúl Pérez-López, 2020. "Generational differences in valuing usefulness, privacy and security negative experiences for paying for cloud services," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 35-60, March.
    18. Michiel Bijlsma & Carin van der Cruijsen & Nicole Jonker, 2020. "Consumer propensity to adopt PSD2 services: trust for sale?," Working Papers 671, DNB.
    19. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2020. "Fostering participation in digital public health interventions: The case of digital contact tracing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-076, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/689933. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    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.