Understanding contextual expectations for sharing wearables' data: Insights from a vignette study

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

People are increasingly open to sharing personal data collected by wearables, while concerns have emerged on how companies, governments and organisations process this data. This paper applies Nissenbaum's theory of contextual integrity to explore the perceived appropriateness of information flows linked to wearables. A vignette study was conducted (N = 500) to examine the influence of the type of data shared, its purpose, and the sender, on the appropriateness of different wearables' information flow scenarios. Results revealed a significant impact of information type, sharing purpose, and sender on the perceived appropriateness of data sharing. Notably, data collected for research purposes or to develop new functionalities was deemed most appropriate, while data used for advertising was viewed unfavourably. Further, the user-controlled sharing received higher appropriateness ratings. This research underscores the need for meaningful consent in data sharing and suggests that manufacturers of wearable devices should utilise user agency to supplement information flow automation based on societal and contextual privacy norms.
Original languageEnglish
Article number100443
Number of pages <span style="color:red"p> <font size="1.5"> ✽ </span> </font>9
Journal Computers in Human Behavior Reports
Volume15
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2024

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The research is supported by SolidLab Vlaanderen (Flemish Government, EWI and RRF project VV023/10). The research design was approved by the ethical committee of the Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors

Keywords

  • Privacy
  • Contextual Integrity
  • Wearables
  • Agency

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Understanding contextual expectations for sharing wearables' data: Insights from a vignette study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this