Privacy Rating: A User-Centered Approach for Visualizing Data Handling Practices of Online Services

Susanne Barth University of Twente ; Dan Ionita University of Twente ; Menno de Jong ; Pieter Hartel University of Twente ; Marianne Junger University of Twente

Abstract

<roman><b>Background:</b></roman> Many countries mandate transparency and consent when personal data are handled by online services. However, most users do not read privacy policies or cannot understand them. An important challenge for technical communicators is empowering users to manage their online privacy responsibly. <roman><b>Literature review:</b></roman> Research suggests that privacy visualizations may alleviate this problem, but existing approaches are incomplete and under-researched. <roman><b>Research questions:</b></roman> 1. How can we design a privacy rating that optimally empowers users with different levels of knowledge about and awareness of online privacy&#x003F; 2. How do users react to such a privacy rating, in terms of usability, perceived usefulness, and trust in online services&#x003F; <roman><b>Methodology:</b></roman> We developed Privacy Rating, a tool for mapping and visualizing the privacy of online services. The tool was subjected to user research (N &#x003D; 30) focusing on usability, perceived usefulness, and effects on trust. To establish the effects on trust, participants were exposed to a website with either a positive or a negative privacy rating. <roman><b>Results:</b></roman> The Privacy Rating appeared to be usable and useful for lay users, and it had a significant effect on users&#x2019; trust in the online service. Users indicated that they would like the visualization to become an established standard, preferably approved by an independent organization. <roman><b>Conclusions:</b></roman> The Privacy Rating is a user-friendly privacy visualization covering all relevant aspects of privacy. We aim to bring the tool to the market and make it a standard, ideally supported by an independent trustworthy organization.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2021-12-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2021.3110617
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication

Cites in this index (3)

  1. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Also cites 40 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1145/2808117.2808119
  2. 10.1007/3-540-45427-6_23
  3. 10.1108/ITP-08-2017-0241
  4. 10.21552/edpl/2019/3/9
  5. 10.1145/3180445.3180447
  6. 10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.013
  7. 10.5210/fm.v11i9.1394
  8. 10.1007/978-3-030-45691-7_75
  9. 10.1145/3025453.3025556
  10. 10.1162/DAED_a_00113
  11. 10.1109/CyberSA.2018.8551442
  12. 10.1515/til-2019-0008
  13. 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2004.tb00865.x
  14. 10.1038/scientificamerican0501-34
  15. 10.1007/978-3-642-20769-3_27
  16. 10.5210/fm.v17i7.4010
  17. 10.1007/978-3-642-20317-6_15
  18. 10.1109/CeDEM.2017.23
  19. 10.1007/978-3-319-46963-8_4
  20. 10.1086/688405
  21. 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2006.00071.x
  22. 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.084
  23. 10.1145/985692.985752
  24. 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-002605
  25. 10.1207/s15506878jobem4903_1
  26. 10.1145/3054926
  27. 10.1016/j.dss.2016.10.002
  28. 10.1515/9781503620766
    A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance  
  29. 10.1145/1572532.1572538
  30. 10.1145/1753326.1753561
  31. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.08.010
  32. 10.1186/s12916-015-0444-y
  33. 10.1086/708034
  34. 10.1371/journal.pone.0173284
  35. 10.1080/10447310801937999
  36. 10.1007/978-3-319-91238-7_45
  37. 10.1109/MCE.2019.2953739
  38. 10.1016/j.tele.2019.03.003
  39. 10.1080/13600869.2013.801589
  40. 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102124