Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
personal information (however that may be defined) that is provided to private actors in a variety
of different contexts.” (Hart, 2020). Although it seems as though protecting one’s private
information online would be a priority for most technology users, there is a lack of federal law
provided to govern data privacy, leaving the legal subject matter and public opinion on data
privacy questionable.
Issues concerning data privacy and consumer sentiments towards data privacy peaked in
2019. Arguably, privacy and cybersecurity issues have become vital topics of discussion in light
of the Russian active measures campaigns and interference in the 2016 U.S. election. The report
from the Select Committee on Intelligence from the United States Senate found in its
investigation of the interference that “the Russian government directed extensive activity,
beginning in at least 2014 and carrying into at least 2017, against U.S. election infrastructure at
the state and local level. (Select Committee on Intelligence, United States Senate, 2016). Since
the federal Government has yet to enact privacy laws, states are taking initiative. In 2018, the
Privacy Act, new State Law developments in Vermont (H.764), Colorado (HB 1128), Ohio
(2018 SB 220), and the advancement of Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) all
were put into action to assure individuals that they have the right to privacy in the age of big data
collection.
Millennials and Generation Z are considered digital natives, meaning they grew up with
technology and the internet. Because of this, studies have shown they are more savvy online,
however does it mean they are more aware of online threats? Growing up trusting the internet
may be a fallacy, but how do these digital natives behave that indicates they value their online
privacy?
generational differences in perceptions and attitudes towards online privacy. Through the use of
discussion in focus groups, the research had findings that helped them understand why there are
generational differences in privacy concerns, especially for younger generations. The study
began by understanding that younger people (identified as ages 15-25) are not less concerned
with privacy, but have different concerns and worries about it (Miltgen). College students are
concerned with “the privacy and security of passwords and social security and credit card
numbers, but they are not afraid of sharing personal data on SNS [Social Networking Sites]”
(Miltgen, 107). Young people may be more understanding and knowledgeable about potential
threats, but they may believe they have more laws governing their privacy than in reality (108).
However, young people feel more personally responsible for being careful online with their
personal data, however when or if issues arise, the younger generation sees these threats in the
Data privacy attitudes have been studied and researched for over 20 years. Since the age
of the internet, people have been faced with issues pertaining to their personal information being
online and out of their control. In a study conducted over a 20 year span, the general population’s
attitudes about data privacy showed that people’s attitudes are mostly non-affected over time.
However, those who identified as “very concerned” with threats to privacy showed more
fluctuation, with 1996 being the year with the most concern to threats of privacy (Regan. 85).
Later in this study, threats to online privacy was evaluated and showed that those who are
concerned with online privacy will always be concerned, as the numbers only slightly fluctuated
over this 20 year span (Regan, 87). What the study did conclude was that younger people,
throughout time, have been seen to care less than other generations about online privacy (98).
The researchers conclude that this is because they grew up in a digital age and are more trusting
(97).
To better understand the use of consent forms in social science, a study by the Journal of
with a consent form. Consent forms used for social science research tend to be overlooked and
not read carefully (Perrault, 50). Consent forms are required by the Institutional Review Board
(IRB) because they highlight the rights of participants and better disclose what they are about to
participate in. This study tried to better understand why consent forms are overlooked and tested
different types of forms to see where the issues are. The study evaluated how students
comprehend consent forms, and the extent to which they read the form, and the time spent with
the form. The findings from the study showed that students who stated they fully read the form,
rather than skimming it or not reading it, were better able to recall information and comprehend
the meaning of the consent form (Perrault, 54). Understanding that the students who fully read
the form were more comprehensive of the information outlines, the study moved on to looking at
why the other students did not feel the need to read the form fully. These findings showed that
some undergraduate students “indicated they did not read the form because they did not think it
was important,” (54) while others claimed “all forms say the same things” (54). Being able to
better understand why students may neglect consent forms, and how it affects their knowledge of
the study, will help this study evaluate more undergraduate perceptions of online data privacy.
c) Why this matters to college students, leading into your research question
This study asked current college students to take a survey which would reflect their
current attitudes and behaviors regarding data privacy to measure how important data privacy is
to our generation. What this doesn’t answer is how privacy attitudes affect retention of
information from consent forms. College students are the most researched persons due to their
close proximity to universities conducting research and the prospect of incentives for research
participation. Because of this, it is crucial that college students know their rights in participating
and read consent forms that outline these rights. When participating in online questionnaires and
surveys, rights include how the participants' personal information will be used and recorded in
We ask: Do students who claim to value data privacy (Independent variable) retain more
Methods
The data collected comes from the sample of 40 Elon University students. For the
experiment, these students will reflect the larger population of “college students” that will be
generalized through this study. These participants were members of the organizations that both
researchers belong to and interact with at Elon University. Participants were recruited through
social media sites such as GroupMe, Instagram, Facebook, and via text. The google forms survey
only allows responses coming from Elon University’s G Suite, meaning the survey will not be
compromised by any outside parties who may receive the link. The survey will not collect any
personal identifiers, meaning there is no way to determine who took the survey or what their
personal responses are. Through ensuring confidentiality, the survey will only contain responses
Measures
The survey was distributed over the social media apps used to recruit participants. To
analyze the data, the results of the survey were transferred into an excel document to measure the
data from every response. The survey consisted of two parts. Part A was created to receive a
general consensus on subjects’ sentiment towards common data privacy issues. REFERENCE
(Buchanan, 2007) All of these questions could be answered by selecting a measure on our likert
scale, (1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Neutral, 4. Agree, 5. Strongly agree). The questions
were created by the Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.
Questions Part 1 (Privacy opinion scale - do a sum across all questions for each person)
Questions Part 2 - other privacy opinion questions (mixed with recall questions)
1. Government authorities should be required to get a warrant before accessing my
Strongly agree).
3. It is possible that damages can be paid for privacy violations on my personal data.
Part B was created to test participants on their recollection of the consent form. It asked
questions about specific information from the consent form. This would show how much
Did you read the entire consent form that you signed before starting this survey? (Y/N).
1. In the consent form: if I elect to either now or any time during the study to withdraw my
2. In the consent form: “this study meets the American Psychological Association’s
standard for “__________” psychologically.” What word goes in the blank? (1. No, 2.
In our procedure to distribute the questionnaire to the participants, we first devised our
hypothesis and research questions for the experiment. When it came time to select our
participants, most students had gone home because of COVID-19. Because of this, there was
only one trial done for the experiment. A group of 40 participantswho would take the survey
only after they had consented to do so. If the spring semester had continued on campus, we
probably would have done numerous trials to see if there were any relevant repeated findings in
our data. Students were selected based on group messages that they were a part of on the social
media platform GroupMe.Each participant then had to decide whether or not they consented to
be a part of the experiment. Over the week that the surveysent on GroupMe, there were 40
responses collected. Repeated efforts to send out the survey to more groups after only 40
students chose to participate, but they were not successful. Every participant had the opportunity
to answer each question once, either answering on a Likert scale, true or false, and short answer.
Analysis
The analysis will begin by looking at the average responses for each question, as given by
each participant. From there, the students who answered “yes” to having read the consent form,
will be compared to the entire group, to see whether they are able to better comprehend and refer
back to the consent form. By comparing not only the responses relating to the consent form, but
the sentiments given about data privacy, the groups will be compared as to what it is they value
in online privacy.
Results
Average and range of students' responses were measured to calculate their attitudes
towards data privacy. These responses were put into excel and analyzed from there. This graph
represents the average score of privacy attitude based on the likert scale. The Likert scale
measured responses on a range of 1-5, (1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disagree; 3. Neutral, 4. Agree; 5.
Strongly agree). The median of the dataset is 2.3. The average answer based on the sum score of
averages for a Likert scale answer is 2.43. Most students were somewhere in between
disagreeing and remaining neutral in response to these questions. Indicating that students
generally may not have had strong opinions in response to data privacy, possibly because it is not
of great interest or importance to them. Repeating the survey would yield data that could elicit a
Likert scale measured responses on a range of 1-5, (1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disagree; 3. Neutral,
4. Agree; 5. Strongly agree). However, in this dataset, instead of a 1-5 range, there is a 9-45
range. This range reflects the scores that show no concern from the students’ perspective (max
score of approx. 9), to the scores that show extreme concern from the students’ perspective (max
score of approx. 45). The median of the dataset is 12.5. The scores averaged 13.4, which
confirms that most students were not too concerned with their data privacy.
Comparison of Data Privacy Sentiments for those who did and did not read the consent
form
Did read (yes) 5 Didn’t read (no) 35
First looking for where the two groups differ, it is apparent that those who read consent
forms were more wary of where their information is going online. On average, participants who
read the consent form stated they were more likely to read terms and agreements before agreeing,
were more likely to use a pop-up window blocker, and remove cookies from their web browser.
Interestingly, the students who read the consent form answered very similarly to the questions
pertaining to whether or not it is right for companies to store personal data. Both groups had an
average sentiment score of 4.57 when asked “Government authorities should be required to get a
warrant before accessing my emails and texts,” and “A company should get my ‘OK’ before
tracking my location.” Looking forward to other trends in the dataset, over half of the
participants believed that their personal information was being stored in taking this survey.
Chart 1. Average and median answers given by those who stated they read the consent form
Chart 2. Average and median answers given by those who stated they did not read the consent
form
Looking at Charts 1 and 2, it is clear that the overall trend in how students respond was
not drastically different based on whether or not the students read the consent form. However,
the scores of those who did read the consent form generally answered with stronger opinions,
making their averages slightly higher than those who did not read. Since both groups have
similar opinions on the issues, it may be that those who read the consent form simply feel
Chart 3. Percentage of participants with correct answers for Part 3 of questions per question
The average grade, if each individual had been graded for these four questions, is 66.6%.
That means that each participant answered two thirds of the questions correctly. Out of the 39
participants, 6 were able to answer all of the questions correctly and all of the participants
participants had a 50% chance of answering correctly. However,the range of answers for one
question was of four answer options. However, this answer received more correct responses than
When asked to recall how long the survey was supposed to take, only 15% of participants
answered correctly. Interestingly, the majority of those who recalled how long their participation
would last were those who answered all other recall questions correctly.
Discussion
To execute the experiment for the data privacy research, we asked current college
students to take a survey which would reflect their current attitudes and behaviors regarding data
privacy to measure how important data privacy is to our generation. The hypothesis suggested
that if an individual has a higher score on the attitudinal (likert) scale, that will indicate the
respondents more comprehensive understanding of data privacy rules and regulations or lack
thereof. The data did not conclusively correlate higher measures in the attitudinal scale as an
indication of the respondents being more comprehensive of data privacy rules and regulations or
lack thereof. Their responses range from (1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disgaree, 3. Neutral, 4. Agree,
and 5. Strongly agree). The higher measures (agree and strongly agree) do not necessarily
demonstrate a more comprehensive understanding, they simply represent the opinions of the
participants. We could not attribute likert scale scores to knowledge on data privacy.
The second hypothesis was that people who have a more comprehensive understanding of
data privacy, are more likely to read the entire consent form and be able to recall the material
from the form during the survey. From the research, it was evident that the overall trend in how
students respond to the survey was not drastically different based on whether or not students read
the consent form. While there is no conclusive evidence that students who read consent forms are
more aware of their data privacy, there is some evidence that the students who do not read the
consent forms do not have strong opinions about their online privacy. Whether this is due to a
lack of knowledge of data privacy or a lack of caring, these students typically gave softer
As stated in the results, the scores of those who did read the consent form generally
answered with stronger opinions, making their averages slightly higher than those who did not
read. The students who read the consent form also, on average, scored higher in Part B of our
survey where they were able to recall information from the consent form and know their rights as
a participant. This highlights the findings in the Journal of Empirical Research on Human
Research Ethics,which explains that students who care more about data privacy may be more
Limitations
This research was limited in that there were only 39 responses and they only came from
Elon students. To further understand and generalize how college students feel about their data
privacy, it is imperative that future studies have larger populations and a more diverse selection
of college students. These limitations were caused due to time constraints and accessibility to the
survey. Being produced during the international pandemic of COVID-19, the study’s deadlines
were jeopardized and the level of engagement of participants may have been affected. The study
was intended to have a final session to reveal findings to the participants, but due to Elon
University going online for the Spring 2020 semester, this focus group will not be possible to do
in person.
Other weaknesses in this study include the actual survey itself. The questions could have
been misleading or not categorized from easy to harder questions. Another possible issue was
that participants could have seen the questions reflecting on the consent form and exited out of
the survey, only to come back and be able to reread the form. This Hawthorne Effect may have
Another possible flaw in this research is that the two investigators sent the survey to
different groups, and may have prefaced the survey in different ways, allowing only certain
people to actually participate, possibly construing the sample population. However, in accepting
these possible weaknesses and flaws, the research did reflect the findings of both Perrault and
Miltgen in that the students who read the consent form were more likely to be able to recall
information from the form; as well as seeing younger people have valued certain privacy
concerns over others. This study adds to the conversation of data privacy attitudes because it
highlights the attitudes of college students participating in social science research and how they
approach a consent form stating their online rights. This research will add commentary to the
Perrault research about consent forms because this study will highlight differences in attitudes
Conclusion
To execute the experiment for the data privacy research, we asked current college
students to take a survey which would reflect their current attitudes and behaviors regarding data
privacy to measure how important data privacy is to our generation. The hypothesis suggested
that if an individual has a higher score on the attitudinal (likert) scale, that will indicate the
respondents more comprehensive understanding of data privacy rules and regulations or lack
thereof. The data did not conclusively correlate higher measures in the attitudinal scale as an
indication of the respondents being more comprehensive of data privacy rules and regulations or
lack thereof. Their responses range from (1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disgaree, 3. Neutral, 4. Agree,
and 5. Strongly agree). The higher measures (agree and strongly agree) do not necessarily
demonstrate a more comprehensive understanding, they simply represent the opinions of the
participants. We could not attribute likert scale scores to knowledge on data privacy.
The second hypothesis was that people who have a more comprehensive understanding of
data privacy, are more likely to read the entire consent form and be able to recall the material
from the form during the survey. Therefore, the higher number of correct answers these
respondents get on the consent form questions, indicates that those respondents are more likely
to be vigilant on data privacy. From the research, it was evident that the overall trend in how
students respond to the survey was not drastically different based on whether or not students read
the consent form. As stated in the results, the scores of those who did read the consent form
generally answered with stronger opinions, making their averages slightly higher than those who
did not read. The students who read the consent form also, on average, scored higher in Part B of
our survey where they were able to recall information from the consent form and know their
rights as a participant. This highlights the findings in the Journal of Empirical Research on
Human Research Ethics,which explains that students who care more about data privacy may be
more aware of their individual rights when participating in a social science research. Revisiting
this hypothesis and altering our study to have larger and broader sample size would help in
determining whether or not people who read consent forms have stronger opinions on data
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank our Professor Dr. Sturgill for being such a great resource for this
project. She really helped guide us in the right direction and taught us how to be more effective
researchers. We would also like to thank all of our anonymous participants, your participation in
our survey has led us to consider greater questions about our generation’s sentiments regarding
data privacy. Hopefully this research will prove useful to policy and law makers in their
Buchanan, T., Joinson, A., Schofield, C. P. & Reips, U. (2007). Development of measures of
online privacy concern and protection for use on the Internet. Journal of the American
Programs. https://www.northeastern.edu/graduate/blog/what-is-data-privacy/.
Miltgen, C. L., & Peyrat-Guillard, D. (2014). Cultural and generational influences on privacy
Perrault, E. K., Keating, D. M. (2018). Seeking Ways to Inform the Uninformed: Improving the
Regan, P. M., Fitzgerald, G., & Balint, P. (2012). Generational views of information privacy.
Interference in the 2016 U.S. Election. (1) Russian Efforts Against Election Infrastructure
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume1.pdf