Disclosure decisions: the combined effects of reciprocity, comparisons, and question sequences.

Premise: The study examines how different information-collection tools influence individuals' voluntary disclosures of sensitive, private information. The individual and combined effects of dyadic relationships comparisons, and question sequences were tested. Methods: A 3 × 3 × 3 between-subjects main experiment was utilized. Using 27 unique online data collection methods, 1,276 participants were randomly assigned to a condition to measure actual voluntary disclosure using a pre-tested set of 18 questions with varying levels of invasiveness, covering themes such as drug use, sexual preferences, medical conditions, and consumption choices. Results: Findings show that invasive questions asked later in the questionnaire maximize divulgence. Using statements to justify the purpose of the information request enhances disclosure percentages. Participants would also mimic the disclosure behavior (or abstention from it) of a majority. Combinations of these factors indicate that disclosure reciprocity is best established by having easy questions asked first. The use of a triple combination was better than the use of these factors individually, except for comparison-inducing messages. Discussion: Our findings expand our understanding of how reciprocity can be established in question-based settings (i.e., through chatbots, structured interviews, medical questionnaires, etc.). Implications emerge on aspects that elevate concerns, for example, by overwhelming individuals with information on comparisons and data use. We map interactions and propose future research to further isolate combinations of disclosure techniques as they are more reflective of real-life situations than their isolated examinations.