How do we value data privacy? Initial results from semi-structured interviews
Creators: name: Carter, Sarah E.
name: Felzmann, Heike
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2023
Subjects: values
data privacy
smartphones
interviews
qualitative
ethics
autonomy
interdisciplinary

description: TALK ABSTRACT
Promoting meaningfulness via value-centered technological interactions is critical if we wish to create technology that supports human flourishing (Bynum, 2006). Currently, privacy decision-making - whether it be on our phones or online—is largely lacking in meaning. When we "click through" an overwhelming amount of privacy notifications or are nudged by dark patterns to consent to giving away our data (Brignull, n.d.), we are acting impulsively, without due reflection on who we are and what we value. 
Here, we will discuss recent findings from a qualitative, semi-structured interview investigation exploring how we value data privacy. This study is part of an interdisciplinary project investigating the role of personal values in data privacy decisions as a means to promote more meaningful user privacy decisions.
In the interviews, questions probed the relationship between privacy and values when selecting a smartphone application as well as privacy decisions made more generally (e.g., online). To elucidate the often unconscious values involved in privacy decisions, questions were designed to obtain statements pertaining to commitments that represent values (example: "can you walk me through how you go about choosing a smartphone app to download?"). This is primarily drawn from an understanding of values as clusters of commitments pertaining to how to be or act that share a similar end state or object (Killmister, 2017). For example, consider an agent who values personal security. Her value of personal security involves commitments not to share pictures of herself online and to not sharing her location with smartphone apps, both oriented towards the desirable end state of maintaining her personal security. In addition to probing commitments, participants were also asked about their affective responses as a representation of underlying values (example: "Can you think of a time when something felt "off" about your privacy online or on your phone?"). Coding proceeded using a process of reflexive thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2022), with emphasis on instances where participants felt unable to act according to their values or where values appeared to be in tension.
We will compare the results of this investigation with an earlier quantitative investigation that surveyed users and their privacy preferences (manuscript in progress). Limitations resulting from the mostly WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, Democratic) participants will also be discussed (Henrich et al., 2010). We conclude by contextualizing this investigation into individual values and privacy decisions within broader societal norms and values around data privacy. 
References
Brignull, H. (n.d.). Deceptive design. Retrieved September 29, 2022, from https://www.deceptive.design
Bynum TW (2006) Flourishing ethics. Ethics Inf Technol 8:157–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-006-9107-1
Braun V, Clarke V (2022). Thematic analysis: a practical guide. (1st ed.). Sage.
Henrich J, Heine SJ, Norenzayan A (2010) The weirdest people in the world? Behav Brain Sci 33:61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
Killmister, S. (2017). Taking the measure of autonomy: A four-dimensional theory of self-governance (1st ed.). Routledge
description: fPET 2023, value change track