ArticlePloS one2025
Research on the "Privacy Paradox" behaviors of online users from the perspective of attitude ambivalence: ERPs evidence.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The "privacy paradox" phenomenon and its explanations are becoming impediments to the correct identification of user privacy attitudes, and understanding the link between privacy attitude instability and behavior helps enterprises to correctly interpret user privacy needs, ensuring the long-term and steady growth of digital businesses. Grounded in the bounded theory of limited cognitive resources and associative-propositional evaluation model (APE model), this research employs ERP technology, targeting the instability of individual attitudes, the study introduces the usefulness of recommendation information and the intrusiveness of recommendation information, privacy intrusiveness and information interestingness, recommendation usefulness and information aversion as experimental stimulus variables of attitude ambivalence, and explores the internal cognitive mechanism of user privacy attitude ambivalence and disclosure behavior. The results show: (1) Under conditions of high intrusiveness of recommendation information, users are more prone to disclose privacy if the recommendation is viewed as highly useful compared to when it is less useful; there is no noteworthy disparity in privacy disclosure under conditions of low informational intrusiveness. (2) Relative to conditions of both high informational intrusiveness with low usefulness, and low privacy intrusiveness combined with low information interestingness, users manifest a higher propensity for privacy disclosure under the circumstances of low privacy invasiveness with highly information interestingness, and high recommendation usefulness along with high information aversion, prompting reduced amplitudes in P2 and N2 waves. Moreover, a larger P2 wave amplitude is evoked when there is lower perceived usefulness in recommendations coupled with less information aversion, as contrasted with higher perceived usefulness and higher aversion. This study examines the cognitive mechanism between privacy attitude ambivalence and disclosure conduct, presenting a fresh perspective for research on the "privacy paradox", enabling businesses to deeply grasp the instability of user attitudes in conjunction with behavioral responses, significantly contributing to better protection of user privacy and the improvement of the user experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.