Interactions Between Culture, Regulatory Structure, and Information Privacy Across Countries

Interactions Between Culture, Regulatory Structure, and Information Privacy Across Countries

Peter Meso, Solomon Negash, Philip F. Musa
Copyright: © 2021 |Pages: 14
DOI: 10.4018/JGIM.20211101.oa49
Article PDF Download
Open access articles are freely available for download

Abstract

We analyze the relationships between country culture and country regulatory structure pertaining to information privacy concerns (IPC) in the context of social media applications. Drawing on prior research we develop a framework that integrates country culture and country regulatory structure and use it as the basis for a study that contrasts samples of 1086 professionals drawn from four countries – United States, United Kingdoms, India and Hong Kong – to assess effects of national culture and of a nation’s regulatory structure on IPC, attitudinal beliefs about information privacy and professionals’ behavioral reactions to IPC. We find that country culture has a strong bearing on explaining differences in individuals’ IPC concerns, attitudinal beliefs about privacy, and behavioral reactions to privacy much more than does country regulatory structure. Country culture remains a significant factor in the management of information privacy. The results also show that country regulatory structure remains deficient in allaying individuals’ concerns pertaining to information privacy.
Article Preview
Top

Introduction

Information privacy remains a significant issue for most individuals and organizations in the emergent data-economy (Chen, 2013; Dinev, 2014; Edwards, Hofmeyr and Forrest, 2016). Much research exists on individuals’ information privacy concerns (IPC), its antecedents, as well as its effects on individual users’ beliefs or behavioral reactions towards information technology. For comprehensive reviews of IPC research, see Yun, Lee, & Kim, 2019; Belanger & Crossler, 2011; Pelteret & Ophoff, 2016; & Magi, 2011.). The maturing of always-connected communications devices continues to contribute to the reported increase in privacy concerns (Yeung, Balebako, Gutierrez & Chaykowsky, 2020; Kantarcioglu & Ferrari, 2019; Georgiadou & Kounadi, 2019; Jensen & Wagner, 2018), especially given the expanding ability of such applications to ubiquitously collect disparate types of an individual’s data (Brennan & Lovells, 2016; Choi, Jiang, Xiao, & Kim, 2015; Choi, Wu, Yu & Land, 2018). As an example, various mobile and digital apps are, by design, capable of surreptitiously, unobtrusively and perpetually accessing, collecting and transmitting vast amounts of individual users’ personal information to extant parties (Lin and Armstrong, 2019; Georgiadou et al., 2019; Turgut et al., 2017; Guo et al., 2008; Lowry et al., 2011). Indeed, protection of privacy and the mitigation of bias and future risks to individuals brought about by privacy breaches now extend to more recent and emergent technologies such as facial recognition technologies (Yeung, et al., 2020), the Internet of Things (Turgut et al., 2017) and self-driving vehicles (Mladenović, et al., 2020).

Past studies have found that concerns about information privacy vary according to cultural dimensions (Cao & Everard, 2008; Guo et al., 2008; Gretzel et al., 2008; Posey et al., 2010; Georgiadou et al., 2019). The ubiquity and near-universal adoption of social media technologies may also likely have a bearing on relationships between country regulatory structure and perceptions of individuals’ information privacy. We also note that changes have continued to occur in the national regulatory structure domain as well. While Europe continued to move towards even tighter privacy regulation, with, for example, the passage of General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) (Wolters, 2017) the US and other regions of the world seem to continue on a path towards less government-directed and more market-based regulatory frameworks or consumer-beware self-regulation frameworks (McDermott, 2017; Georgiadou, et al., 2019).

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Volume 32: 1 Issue (2024)
Volume 31: 9 Issues (2023)
Volume 30: 12 Issues (2022)
Volume 29: 6 Issues (2021)
Volume 28: 4 Issues (2020)
Volume 27: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 26: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 25: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 24: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 23: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 22: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 21: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 20: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 19: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 18: 4 Issues (2010)
Volume 17: 4 Issues (2009)
Volume 16: 4 Issues (2008)
Volume 15: 4 Issues (2007)
Volume 14: 4 Issues (2006)
Volume 13: 4 Issues (2005)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2004)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2003)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2002)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2001)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2000)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (1999)
Volume 6: 4 Issues (1998)
Volume 5: 4 Issues (1997)
Volume 4: 4 Issues (1996)
Volume 3: 4 Issues (1995)
Volume 2: 4 Issues (1994)
Volume 1: 4 Issues (1993)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing