Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Geotagging in social media: exploring the privacy paradox
University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
University of Borås, Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT.
2015 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

Increasingly, online social media networks allow users to use geotagging. This method of adding location data to various content shared in real time has introduced privacy related issues and threats to the users of such networks. Previous research present opposing findings on whether users actually care about their location privacy or not, and it has also been shown that users often display a behaviour inconsistent with their concerns. When asked, users tend to report high privacy concerns, but in contrast, they will then not let their privacy concerns affect or limit their behaviour online; the privacy paradox is a description of this dichotomy. The problem, however, is not only that location privacy seems to be a paradoxical issue; the sharing of location data provides users with new possibilities that can potentially have negative consequences for them, such as someone else being able to identify one’s identity, home location, habits or other sensitive information. Social media network users communicate that a part of this is due to the lack of control over which information they share, with whom and where.This study employs a qualitative method, using unstructured interviews in a pre-study and a self-completion questionnaire. The purpose of the study is to examine and gain a better understanding of how the privacy paradox can help to better explain users’ location data disclosure preferences in the context of social media networking, and to help social media network developers in order to reduce privacy-related issues in social media networking applications with geotagging capabilities. The findings indicate that the paradox indeed is evident in user’s stated geotagging behaviour, and that users are slightly more worried about their location privacy than their overall online privacy. The conclusions offer a couple of different explanations for the paradox, and we argue that the contradiction of the paradox can be seen as a constant trade-off between benefits and risks of geotagging. We also give some examples of such advantages and disadvantages.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. , 69 p.
Keyword [en]
Location Data Privacy, Geotagging, Geo-social Networks (GeoSNs), Privacy Paradox, Privacy concerns
National Category
Computer and Information Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-8685OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hb-8685DiVA: diva2:896762
Subject / course
Informatics
Uppsok
Social and Behavioural Science, Law
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2016-01-25 Created: 2016-01-22 Last updated: 2016-01-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

2014KANI17(1556 kB)702 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1556 kBChecksum SHA-512
dc3bc6923e51a4a7b74de2b801697cf788af6c95a3e2a498dbfd51181b5a506a8f080a438dc00357a239ef34edeaad8d7dad5c52d3a8c927da7293b0bbef562f
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Faculty of Librarianship, Information, Education and IT
Computer and Information Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 702 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 602 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf