Users’ Information Disclosure Behaviors during Interactions with Chatbots: The Effect of Information Disclosure Nudges
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing from the tension between a company’s desire for customer information to tailor experiences and a consumer’s need for privacy, this study aims to test the effect of two information disclosure nudges on users’ information disclosure behaviors. Whereas previous literature on user-chatbot interaction focused on encouraging and increasing users’ disclosures, this study introduces measures that make users conscious of their disclosure behaviors to low and high-sensitivity questions asked by chatbots. A within-subjects laboratory experiment entailed 19 participants interacting with chatbots, responding to pre-tested questions of varying sensitivity while being presented with different information disclosure nudges. The results suggest that question sensitivity negatively impacts users’ information disclosures to chatbots. Moreover, this study suggests that adding a sensitivity signal—presenting the level of sensitivity of the question asked by the chatbot—influences users’ information disclosure behaviors. Finally, the theoretical contributions and managerial implications of the results are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it