Examining Self-Disclosure on Social Networking Sites: A Flow Theory and Privacy Perspective
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
Self-Disclosure on SNS
3. Hypotheses Development and Research Model
3.1. Flow
3.2. Focused Attention (FAT)
3.3. Interaction (FINT)
3.4. Perceived Control (PCL)
3.5. Privacy Awareness (PA)
3.6. Privacy Concerns (PC)
3.7. Privacy Invasion Experience (PIE)
3.8. Privacy Risk (PR)
3.9. Tie Strength (TS)
4. Methodology
4.1. Measurement Instrument
4.2. Sample and Data Collection
5. Results and Analysis
5.1. Measurement Model Assessment
5.2. Structural Model Assessment
6. Discussion
6.1. Implications
6.2. Limitations and Directions for Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
- PCL1: I feel I am in control over the information I provide on my favorite social networking site
- PCL2: Privacy settings allow me to have full control over the information I provide on my favorite social networking site
- PCL3: I feel I am in control of who can view my information on my favorite social networking site
- PIE1: How often have you personally been a victim of what you felt was an invasion of privacy?
- PIE2: How much have you heard or read during the last year about the use and potential misuse of information privacy about consumers?
- PA1: I have read the privacy statement of my favourite SNS
- PA2: The privacy statement of my favorite SNS is easy to understand
- PA3: The privacy settings of my favorite SNS are easy to use
- PA4: I understand all the privacy setting of my favorite SNS
- PA5: I am aware of all the appropriate actions to ensure my privacy on my favorite SNS
- PA6: I am aware of my privacy rights and responsibilities on my favorite SNS
- PC1:1 I am concerned that the information I share on SNS could be misused.
- PC2:1 I am concerned that a person can find private information about me on social networks.
- PC3:1 I am concerned about submitting information on SNS, because of what others might do with it.
- PC4:1 I am concerned about submitting information on SNS, because it could be used in a way I did not foresee
- SD1: I have a comprehensive profile on my favorite social networking platform
- SD2: I find time to keep my profile up-to-date
- SD3: I keep my friends updated about what is going on in my life through my favorite social networking site
- SD4: When I have something to say, I like to share it on favorite social networking site
- PR1: The chances of using social networking sites and losing control over the privacy of my personal information is high
- PR2: My signing up and using of social networking sites would lead me to a loss of privacy because my personal information would be used without my knowledge
- PR3: Internet hackers (criminals) might take control of my account if I self-disclose on social networking site
- AF1: When using my favorite social networking site, I am absorbed intensely in the activity
- AF2: When using my favorite social networking site, my attention is focused on the activity.
- AF3: When using my favorite social networking site, I concentrate fully on the activity.
- AF4: When using my favorite social networking site, I am deeply engrossed in the activity.
- FINT1: SNS provides much opportunities to participate in communication using online group or communities
- FINT2: SNS supports function to make connection with other users
- FINT3: SNS helps make swift sharing of thoughts or feelings
- FINT4: SNS helps building social relationships with other users
- TS1: I have good relationships with people in my online social network
- TS2: I am in close contact with the people in my online social network
- TS3: I enjoy reading news stories shared by the people in my online social network
References
- Wang, X.; Yu, C.; Wei, Y. Social media peer communication and impacts on purchase intentions: A consumer socialization framework. J. Interact. Mark. 2012, 26, 198–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, K.; Wang, X.; Li, K.; Che, J. Information privacy disclosure on social network sitess: An empirical investigation from social exchange perspective. Nankai Bus. Rev. Int. 2016, 7, 282–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Kim, B.G. The impact of qualities of social network service on the continuance usage intention. Manag. Decis. 2017, 55, 701–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krasnova, H.; Kolesnikova, E.; Guenther, O. Leveraging trust and privacy concerns in online social networks: An empirical study. In Proceedings of the 18th European Conference on Information Systems, Pretoria, South Africa, 7–9 June 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Ellison, N.B.; Boyd, D.M. Sociality through social network sites. In The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies; Dutton, W.H., Ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Aharony, N. Relationships among attachment theory, social capital perspective, personality characteristics, and Facebook self-disclosure. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 2016, 68, 362–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jourard, S.M.; Lasakow, P. Some factors in self-disclosure. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 1958, 56, 91–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wheeless, L.R.; Grotz, J. Conceptualization and measuremenet of reported self-disclosure. Hum. Commun. Res. 1976, 2, 338–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, C.; Lee, Z.W.Y.; Chan, T.K.H. Self-disclosure in social networking sites: The role of perceived cost, perceived benefits and social influence. Internet Res. 2015, 25, 279–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seidman, G. Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences social media use and motivations. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2013, 54, 402–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krasnova, H.; Veltri, N.F.; Günther, P.O. Self-disclosure and privacy calculus on social networking sites: The role of culture intercultural dynamics of privacy calculus. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 2012, 4, 127–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christofides, E.; Muise, A.; Desmarais, S. Information disclosure and control on facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different processes? CyberPsychology Behav. 2009, 12, 341–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bazarova, N.N.; Choi, Y.H. Self-disclosure in social media: Extending the functional approach to disclosure motivations and characteristics on social network sites. J. Commun. 2014, 64, 635–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walrave, M.; Vanwesenbeeck, I.; Heirman, W. Connecting and protecting? Comparing predictors of self-disclosure and privacy settings use between adolescents and adults. CyberpsychologyJournal Psychosoc. Res. Cybersp. 2012, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan, A.M.; Haenlein, M. Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Bus. Horiz. 2010, 53, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bao, Z. Exploring continuance intention of social networking sites An empirical study integrating social support and network externalities. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 2016, 68, 736–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mangold, W.G.; Faulds, D.J. Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Bus. Horiz. 2009, 52, 357–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, K.; Lu, H. Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2011, 27, 1152–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lipford, H.R.; Wisniewski, P.J.; Lampe, C.; Kisselburgh, L.; Caine, K. Reconciling privacy with social media. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work Companion—CSCW ’12, Seattle, WA, USA, 11–15 February 2012; pp. 19–20. [Google Scholar]
- Malik, A.; Hiekkanen, K.; Dhir, A.; Nieminen, M. Impact of privacy, trust and user activity on intentions to share Facebook photos. J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc. 2016, 14, 364–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acquisti, A.; Gross, R. Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the facebook. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Danezis, G., Golle, P., Eds.; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2006; Volume 4258, pp. 36–58. [Google Scholar]
- Dinev, T.; Hart, P. An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions. Inf. Syst. Res. 2006, 17, 61–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, R.; Sharma, S.K. Learning and self-disclosure behavior on social networking sites: The case of Facebook users. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2015, 24, 93–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joinson, A.N.; Paine, C.B. Self-disclosure, Privacy and the Internet. In Oxford Handbook of Internet Psychology; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2012; pp. 237–252. ISBN 9780191743771. [Google Scholar]
- Hugl, U. Reviewing person’s value of privacy of online social networking. Internet Res. 2011, 21, 384–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Correa, T.; Hinsley, A.W.; de Zúñiga, H.G. Who interacts on the Web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 247–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, K.-Y.; Lu, H.-P. Predicting mobile social network acceptance based on mobile value and social influence. Internet Res. 2015, 25, 107–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, D.; Brown, B.B. Self-disclosure on social networking sites, positive feedback, and social capital among Chinese college students. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 38, 213–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, C.W.; Heo, J. Visiting theories that predict college students’ self-disclosure on Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 30, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chou, Y.-J.; Teng, C.-I.; Lo, S.-K. Mutual self-disclosure online in the B2C context. Internet Res. 2009, 19, 466–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taddicken, M. The “Privacy Paradox” in the social web: The impact of privacy concerns, individual characteristics, and the perceived social relevance on different forms of self-disclosure. J. Comput. Commun. 2014, 19, 248–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahn, Y.-Y.; Han, S.; Kwak, H.; Moon, S.; Jeong, H. Analysis of topological characteristics of huge online social networking services. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web - WWW ’07, Banff, AB, Canada, 8–12 May 2007; p. 835. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, B.; Marcus, J. Students’ self-presentation on Facebook: An examination of personality and self-construal factors. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 2091–2099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyd, D.; Ellison, N.B. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. J. Comput. Commun. 2007, 13, 210–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffman, D.L.; Novak, T.P. Flow Online: Lessons Learned and Future Prospects. J. Interact. Mark. 2009, 23, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, L.Y.; Hsieh, Y.J.; Wu, Y.C.J. Gratifications and social network service usage: The mediating role of online experience. Inf. Manag. 2014, 51, 774–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwak, K.T.; Choi, S.K.; Lee, B.G. SNS flow, SNS self-disclosure and post hoc interpersonal relations change: Focused on Korean Facebook user. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 31, 294–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, E.Y.; Lin, S.-W.; Fan, Y.-C. M-S-QUAL: Mobile service quality measurement. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2015, 14, 126–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shabbir, H.; Palihawadana, D.; Thwaites, D. Determining the antecedents and consequences of donor-perceived relationship quality-a dimensional qualitative research approach. Psychol. Mark. 2007, 24, 271–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Debatin, B.; Lovejoy, J.P.; Horn, A.K.; Hughes, B.N. Facebook and online privacy: Attitudes, behaviors, and unintended consequences. J. Comput. Commun. 2009, 15, 83–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellison, N.B.; Steinfield, C.; Lampe, C. The benefits of facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. J. Comput. Commun. 2007, 12, 1143–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Special, W.P.; Li-Barber, K.T. Self-disclosure and student satisfaction with Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 624–630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sherry, J.L. Flow and media enjoyment. Commun. Theory 2004, 14, 328–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burke, M.; Marlow, C.; Lento, T. Social network activity and social well-being. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, GA, USA, 10–15 April 2010; pp. 1909–1912. [Google Scholar]
- Culnan, M.J.; Armstrong, P.K. Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: An empirical investigation. Organ. Sci. 1999, 10, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, H.; Dinev, T.; Smith, H.J.; Hart, P. Examining the formation of individual’s privacy concerns: Toward an integrative view. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information System 2008 Proceedings, Algarve, Portugal, 9–11 April 2008; pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Ridings, C.M.; Gefen, D.; Arinze, B. Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2002, 11, 271–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Salaway, G.; Caruso, J. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2007; Educause: Boulder, CO, USA, 2008; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Raynes-Goldie, K. Aliases, creeping, and wall cleaning: Understanding privacy in the age of facebook. First Monday 2010, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoadley, C.M.; Xu, H.; Lee, J.J.; Rosson, M.B. Privacy as information access and illusory control: The case of the Facebook News Feed privacy outcry. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 2010, 9, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- O’Bien, D.; Torres, A. Social Networking and Online Privacy: Facebook Users’ Perceptions. Ir. J. Manag. 2012, 31, 63–97. [Google Scholar]
- Stutzman, F.; Gross, R.; Acquisti, A. Silent Listeners: The Evolution of Privacy and Disclosure on Facebook. J. Priv. Confid. 2012, 4, 7–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strater, K.; Lipford, H. Strategies and struggles with privacy in an online social networking community. In Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction, Liverpool, UK, 1–5 September 2008; pp. 111–119. [Google Scholar]
- Pan, Y.; Zinkhan, G.M. Exploring the impact of online privacy disclosures on consumer trust. J. Retail. 2006, 82, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffman, E.; Mccabe, K.; Smith, V.L. Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games. Am. Econ. Rev. 1996, 86, 653–660. [Google Scholar]
- Meinert, D.B.; Peterson, D.K.; Criswell, J.R.; Crossland, M.D. Privacy policy statements and consumer willingness to provide personal information. J. Electron. Commer. Organ. 2006, 4, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dwyer, C.; Hiltz, S.R.; Passerini, K. Trust and privacy concern within social networking sites: A comparison of Facebook and MySpace. In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Keystone, CO, USA, 9–12 August 2007; Volume 123, pp. 339–350. [Google Scholar]
- Tan, X.; Qin, L.; Kim, Y.; Hsu, J. Impact of privacy concern in social networking web sites. Internet Res. 2012, 22, 211–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyd, D.; Hargittai, E. Facebook privacy settings: Who cares? First Monday 2010, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rifon, N.J.; Larose, R.; Choi, S.M. Your privacy is sealed: Effects of web privacy seals on trust and personal disclosures. J. Consum. Aff. 2005, 39, 339–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cho, H.; Lee, J.S.; Chung, S. Optimistic bias about online privacy risks: Testing the moderating effects of perceived controllability and prior experience. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 987–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hogben, G. Security issues and recommendations for online social networks. Enisa 2007, 1, 1–33. [Google Scholar]
- Malhotra, N.K.; Kim, S.S.; Agarwal, J.; Tech, G.; Peachtree, W. Internet Users’ The Information the Scale, and a Causal (IUIPC). Inf. Syst. Res. 2004, 15, 336–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Metzger, M.J. Privacy, Trust, and Disclosure: Exploring Barriers to Electronic Commerce. J. Comput. Commun. 2006, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.-P.; Bhattacherjee, A. Elucidating individual intention to use interactive information technologies: The role of network externalities. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2008, 13, 85–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litt, E. Understanding social network site users’ privacy tool use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013, 29, 1649–1656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Petronio, S. Boundaries of Privacy: Dialectics of DISCLOSURe; State University of New York Press: New York, NY, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Nitzburg, G.C.; Farber, B.A. Putting up emotional (Facebook) walls? Attachment status and emerging adults’ experiences of social networking sites. J. Clin. Psychol. 2013, 69, 1183–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yaakobi, E.; Goldenberg, J. Social relationships and information dissemination in virtual social network systems: An attachment theory perspective. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 38, 127–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyd, D. Facebook’s privacy train wreck: Exposure, invasion, and social convergence. Converg. Int. J. Res. New Media Technol. 2008, 14, 13–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boudreau, M.-C.; Gefen, D.; Straub, D.W. Validation in information systems research: A state-of-the-art assessment. MIS Q. 2001, 25, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, T. Understanding mobile Internet continuance usage from the perspectives of UTAUT and flow. Inf. Dev. 2011, 27, 207–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krasnova, H.; Spiekermann, S.; Koroleva, K.; Hildebrand, T. Online social networks: Why we disclose. J. Inf. Technol. 2010, 25, 109–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koufaris, M. Applying the Technology Acceptance Model and flow theory to online consumer behavior. J. Inf. Syst. Res. 2002, 13, 205–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martins, C.; Oliveira, T.; Popovič, A. Understanding the internet banking adoption: A unified theory of acceptance and use of technology and perceived risk application. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2014, 34, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, L.; Sian Lee, C.; Hoe-Lian Goh, D. Understanding news sharing in social media: An explanation from the diffusion of innovations theory. Online Inf. Rev. 2014, 38, 598–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In Modern Methods for Business Research; Psychology Press: New York, NY, USA, 1998; Volume 295, ISBN 0805826777. [Google Scholar]
- Henseler, J.; Hubona, G.; Ray, P.A. Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016, 116, 2–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.F.; Hult, T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014; ISBN 9781452217444. [Google Scholar]
- Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurements error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, K.W.; Huang, S.Y.; Yen, D.C.; Popova, I. The effect of online privacy policy on consumer privacy concern and trust. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 889–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mosteller, J.; Poddar, A. To Share and Protect: Using Regulatory Focus Theory to Examine the Privacy Paradox of Consumers’ Social Media Engagement and Online Privacy Protection Behaviors. J. Interact. Mark. 2017, 39, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nemec Zlatolas, L.; Welzer, T.; Heričko, M.; Hölbl, M. Privacy antecedents for SNS self-disclosure: The case of Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 45, 158–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Awad, N.F.; Krishnan, M.S. The personalization privacy paradox: An empirical evaluation of information transparency and the willingness to be profiled online for personalization. MIS Q. 2006, 30, 13–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Y.Q.; Chang, J.H. The key role of relevance in personalized advertisement: Examining its impact on perceptions of privacy invasion, self-awareness, and continuous use intentions. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 65, 442–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zailskaite-Jakste, L.; Kuvykaite, R. Consumer Engagement in Social Media by Building the Brand. In Proceedings of the Electronic International Interdisciplinary Conference 2012; 2012; pp. 194–202. Available online: http://www.eiic.cz/archive/?vid=1&aid=2&kid=20101-116 (accessed on 6 June 2018).
- Crawford, K. Listening, not Lurking: The Neglected Form of Participation. Cult. Particip. 2011, 63–74. [Google Scholar]
Profile | Measurements | Frequency | Percent |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 209 | 46.2 |
Female | 243 | 53.8 | |
Age range | <18 | 102 | 22.6 |
18–24 | 153 | 33.8 | |
25–30 | 119 | 26.3 | |
31–40 | 78 | 17.3 | |
Level of Study | Undergraduate | 297 | 65.7 |
Postgraduate | 155 | 34.3 | |
Privacy settings: my private information is accessible to | Friends only | 131 | 29.0 |
Friends and their friends | 103 | 22.8 | |
Public | 160 | 35.4 | |
Don’t know | 58 | 12.8 | |
Frequency of disclosure | Several times a day | 167 | 37.0 |
Once a day | 115 | 25.4 | |
Once a week | 76 | 16.8 | |
Bi-weekly | 51 | 11.3 | |
Once a month | 43 | 9.5 | |
N = 452 |
Constructs | Items | Loadings | T-Statistics | α | CR | AVE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Attention Focus | FAT1 | 0.823 | 32.920 | 0.854 | 0.901 | 0.696 |
FAT2 | 0.852 | 44.494 | ||||
FAT3 | 0.849 | 37.710 | ||||
FAT4 | 0.811 | 31.753 | ||||
Interaction | FINT1 | 0.798 | 24.015 | 0.835 | 0.886 | 0.660 |
FINT2 | 0.802 | 23.698 | ||||
FINT3 | 0.782 | 16.034 | ||||
FINT4 | 0.864 | 35.422 | ||||
Privacy Awareness | PA1 | 0.763 | 30.056 | 0.888 | 0.915 | 0.641 |
PA2 | 0.827 | 44.898 | ||||
PA3 | 0.848 | 50.696 | ||||
PA4 | 0.806 | 36.577 | ||||
PA5 | 0.781 | 24.422 | ||||
PA6 | 0.775 | 29.747 | ||||
Privacy Concerns | PC1 | 0.920 | 109.744 | 0.953 | 0.964 | 0.843 |
PC2 | 0.937 | 147.906 | ||||
PC3 | 0.932 | 150.543 | ||||
PC4 | 0.898 | 61.087 | ||||
PC5 | 0.903 | 85.809 | ||||
Perceived Control | PCL1 | 0.875 | 26.003 | 0.875 | 0.922 | 0.797 |
PCL2 | 0.923 | 49.418 | ||||
PCL3 | 0.879 | 29.125 | ||||
Privacy Invasion Experience | PIE1 | 0.962 | 223.840 | 0.918 | 0.960 | 0.924 |
PIE2 | 0.960 | 183.550 | ||||
Self-Disclosure | SD1 | 0.874 | 73.241 | 0.891 | 0.924 | 0.754 |
SD2 | 0.875 | 66.567 | ||||
SD3 | 0.889 | 78.196 | ||||
SD4 | 0.833 | 45.000 | ||||
Privacy Risk | PR1 | 0.953 | 150.569 | 0.955 | 0.971 | 0.918 |
PR2 | 0.960 | 219.202 | ||||
PR3 | 0.961 | 230.820 | ||||
Tie Strength | TS1 | 0.885 | 57.270 | 0.847 | 0.907 | 0.765 |
TS2 | 0.851 | 34.363 | ||||
TS3 | 0.888 | 51.252 |
FAT | FINT | PCL | PA | PC | PIE | PR | SD | TS | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAT | 0.834 | ||||||||
INT | 0.614 | 0.812 | |||||||
PCL | 0.303 | 0.238 | 0.893 | ||||||
PA | 0.210 | 0.195 | 0.160 | 0.801 | |||||
PC | 0.016 | 0.051 | −0.002 | −0.206 | 0.918 | ||||
PIE | −0.007 | −0.005 | 0.070 | −0.204 | 0.256 | 0.961 | |||
PR | −0.002 | −0.033 | −0.062 | −0.134 | 0.239 | 0.201 | 0.958 | ||
SD | 0.273 | 0.251 | 0.166 | 0.466 | −0.385 | −0.393 | −0.495 | 0.868 | |
TS | 0.385 | 0.364 | 0.235 | 0.283 | −0.040 | 0.006 | −0.040 | 0.275 | 0.875 |
FAT | FINT | PCL | PA | PC | PIE | PR | SD | TS | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FAT | |||||||||
FINT | 0.721 | ||||||||
PCL | 0.357 | 0.276 | |||||||
PA | 0.238 | 0.223 | 0.178 | ||||||
PC | 0.036 | 0.068 | 0.040 | 0.224 | |||||
PIE | 0.061 | 0.043 | 0.080 | 0.225 | 0.273 | ||||
PR | 0.040 | 0.077 | 0.068 | 0.147 | 0.248 | 0.215 | |||
SD | 0.312 | 0.267 | 0.182 | 0.523 | 0.414 | 0.435 | 0.536 | ||
TS | 0.451 | 0.425 | 0.271 | 0.322 | 0.050 | 0.020 | 0.048 | 0.313 |
Hypotheses | Hypothesized Path | Path Coefficient | T-Statistics | p Values | Result |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | FAT → SD | 0.123 | 2.736 | 0.006 | Supported |
H2 | FINT → SD | 0.078 | 1.849 | 0.064 | Not Supported |
H3 | PCL → SD | 0.040 | 1.292 | 0.197 | Not Supported |
H4 | PA → SD | 0.259 | 6.543 | 0.000 | Supported |
H5 | PC → SD | −0.190 | 6.100 | 0.000 | Supported |
H6 | PIE → SD | −0.221 | 6.378 | 0.000 | Supported |
H7 | PR → SD | −0.361 | 12.162 | 0.000 | Supported |
H8 | TS → SD | 0.096 | 2.900 | 0.004 | Supported |
Model Fit | |||||
SRMR | 0.044 | ||||
R-Squared | 0.546 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Ampong, G.O.A.; Mensah, A.; Adu, A.S.Y.; Addae, J.A.; Omoregie, O.K.; Ofori, K.S. Examining Self-Disclosure on Social Networking Sites: A Flow Theory and Privacy Perspective. Behav. Sci. 2018, 8, 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8060058
Ampong GOA, Mensah A, Adu ASY, Addae JA, Omoregie OK, Ofori KS. Examining Self-Disclosure on Social Networking Sites: A Flow Theory and Privacy Perspective. Behavioral Sciences. 2018; 8(6):58. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8060058
Chicago/Turabian StyleAmpong, George Oppong Appiagyei, Aseda Mensah, Adolph Sedem Yaw Adu, John Agyekum Addae, Osaretin Kayode Omoregie, and Kwame Simpe Ofori. 2018. "Examining Self-Disclosure on Social Networking Sites: A Flow Theory and Privacy Perspective" Behavioral Sciences 8, no. 6: 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8060058
APA StyleAmpong, G. O. A., Mensah, A., Adu, A. S. Y., Addae, J. A., Omoregie, O. K., & Ofori, K. S. (2018). Examining Self-Disclosure on Social Networking Sites: A Flow Theory and Privacy Perspective. Behavioral Sciences, 8(6), 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8060058