UNDERSTANDING EMERGENCE AND OUTCOMES OF INFORMATION PRIVACY CONCERNS: A CASE OF FACEBOOK
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 on content analysis of user responses to the revisions in the Facebook Privacy Policy, this study develops a process model to explain emergence and outcome processes of users’ information privacy concerns in an online social networking context. The first phase of the model proposes three broad categories of informational practices – collection and storage; processing and use; and dissemination of personal data—associated with users’ information privacy concerns. This phase also identifies the conditions under which proposed practices are attributed as privacy issues. The second phase of the model describes outcomes of perceived privacy issues by proposing users’ affective and behavioral responses. The findings provide evidence for, (1) the important role of trigger conditions in emergence of users’ information privacy concerns, (2) the gap between privacy issues that are perceived by users and identified by domain experts, (3) the uniqueness of online social networking context in providing distinct privacy challenges.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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