Improving notice: the argument for a flexible, multi-value approach to privacy notice design
Creators: name: Carter, Sarah E.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2021
Subjects: privacy
values
autonomy
privacy paradox

description: <em><strong>TALK ABSTRACT</strong></em> Presented at APPE 2021 <strong><em>Improving notice: the argument for a flexible, multi-value approach to privacy notice design</em></strong> In this presentation, I establish the need for a flexible, multi-value approach to privacy notice design. To support this view, I firstly conceptualize privacy and the notice-and-consent processes as value-laden entities. I then then show how these conceptualizations can be used to explain a particular phenomenon in digital privacy research, the privacy paradox. To the first objective, I sketch the value of privacy itself as an elusive, nondescript entity that exists in a complex landscape of many overlapping values. I draw on the work of Daniel Solove and his pluralistic conception of privacy as a collection of related items that share no obvious commonalities but nonetheless resemble each other.<sup>1,2</sup> I then argue that notice-and-consent can be conceptualized as a complex autonomous decision-making process that involves weighing multiple values. I utilize Suzy Killmister’s conception of autonomy, which she views as a complex landscape of different dimensions: <em>self-definition, </em>a cluster of commitments formed by an agent’s goals, beliefs and values; <em>self-realization, </em>practical deliberation to form an intention (internal), and acting on one’s intention (external); <em>self-unification,</em> whether what one self-realizes is consistent with what one has self-defined; and <em>self-constitution, </em>the agent’s ability to take on new commitments.<sup>3</sup> To the second aim, I argue that the existence of a privacy paradox – that is, the observed discrepancy between a user’s online behavior and their stated privacy preferences<sup>4</sup> - is the result of misunderstanding the notice-and-consent decision making process as a uni-value (privacy) instead of a multi-value endeavor. This is in contrast to traditional explanations of the privacy paradox, that view it either as a result of irrational, heuristic-based thinking, or rational but misinformed risk/benefit analyses on the part of users.<sup>5</sup> I then conclude that privacy notices should be designed to be adequately flexible to facilitate many user values. Striving to make privacy notices more value-sensitive in this manner could better serve both the user and the developer by promoting better alignment between developer data collection practices and user values. <strong>References</strong> 1. Solove DJ. “I’ve Got Nothing To Hide” and other Misunderstandings. <em>New York</em>. 2007. 2. Solove DJ. Conceptualizing privacy. <em>Calif Law Rev</em>. 2002;90(4):1087-1155. doi:10.2307/3481326 3. Killmister S. <em>Taking the Measure of Autonomy: A Four-Dimensional Theory of Self-Governance</em>. 1st ed. New York: Routledge; 2017. https://www.amazon.com/Taking-Measure-Autonomy-Four-Dimensional-Self-Governance/dp/1138700126. 4. Spiekermann S, Grossklags J, Berendt B. E-privacy in 2nd generation E-commerce: Privacy preferences versus actual behavior. <em>Proc ACM Conf Electron Commer</em>. 2001:38-47. 5. Barth S, de Jong MDT. The privacy paradox – Investigating discrepancies between expressed privacy concerns and actual online behavior – A systematic literature review. <em>Telemat Informatics</em>. 2017;34(7):1038-1058. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.04.013