In the context of a myriad of mobile apps which collect personally identifiable information (PII) and a prospective market place of personal data, we investigate a user-centric monetary valuation of mobile PII. During a 6-week long user study in a living lab deployment with 60 participants, we collected their daily valuations of 4 categories of mobile PII (communication, e.g. phonecalls made received, applications, e.g. time spent on different apps, location and media, e.g. photos taken) at three levels of complexity (individual data points, aggregated statistics and processed, i.e. meaningful interpretations of the data). In order to obtain honest valuations, we employ a reverse second price auction mechanism. Our findings show that the most sensitive and valued category of personal information is location. We report statistically significant associations between actual mobile usage, personal dispositions, and bidding behavior. Finally, we outline key implications for the design of mobile services and future markets of personal data.
Individual differences are also found when providing economic valuations of personal data @cite_21 @cite_25 . For instance, some individuals may not be concerned about privacy and would allow access to their data in exchange for a few cents, whereas others may only consent if well paid. Recently, Aperjis and Huberman @cite_52 proposed to introduce a realistic market for personal data that pays individuals for their data while taking into account their own privacy and risk attitudes.
@cite_52 @cite_21 @cite_25
1967317786 2110870121 2119486295 1989291641
AbstractUnderstanding the value that individuals assign to the protection of their personal data is of great importance for business, law, and public policy. We use a field experiment informed by behavioral economics and decision research to investigate individual privacy valuations and find evidence of endowment and order effects. Individuals assigned markedly different values to the privacy of their data depending on (1) whether they were asked to consider how much money they would accept to disclose otherwise private information or how much they would pay to protect otherwise public information and (2) the order in which they considered different offers for their data. The gap between such values is large compared with that observed in comparable studies of consumer goods. The results highlight the sensitivity of privacy valuations to contextual, nonnormative factors. Since there is, in principle, no reason why third parties should not pay individuals for the use of their data, we introduce a realistic market that would allow these payments to be made while taking into account the privacy attitude of the participants. And since it is usually important to use unbiased samples to obtain credible statistical results, we examine the properties that such a market should have and suggest a mechanism that compensates those individuals that participate according to their risk attitudes. Equally important, we show that this mechanism also benefits buyers, as they pay less for the data than they would if they compensated all individuals with the same maximum fee that the most concerned ones expect. The advent of the Internet has made the transmission of personally identifiable information more common and often unintended by the user. As personal information becomes more accessible, individuals worry that businesses misuse the information that is collected while they are online. Organizations have tried to mitigate this concern in two ways: (1) by offering privacy policies regarding the handling and use of personal information and (2) by offering benefits such as financial gains or convenience. In this paper, we interpret these actions in the context of the information-processing theory of motivation. Information-processing theories, also known as expectancy theories in the context of motivated behavior, are built on the premise that people process information about behavior-outcome relationships. By doing so, they are forming expectations and making decisions about what behavior to choose. Using an experimental setting, we empirically validate predictions that the means to mitigate privacy concerns are associated with positive valences resulting in an increase in motivational score. In a conjoint analysis exercise, 268 participants from the United States and Singapore face trade-off situations, where an organization may only offer incomplete privacy protection or some benefits. While privacy protections (against secondary use, improper access, and error) are associated with positive valences, we also find that financial gains and convenience can significantly increase individuals' motivational score of registering with a Web site. We find that benefits-monetary reward and future convenience-significantly affect individuals' preferences over Web sites with differing privacy policies. We also quantify the value of Web site privacy protection. Among U.S. subjects, protection against errors, improper access, and secondary use of personal information is worth @math 44.62. Finally, our approach also allows us to identify three distinct segments of Internet users-privacy guardians, information sellers, and convenience seekers. Personal data has value to both its owner and to institutions who would like to analyze it. Privacy mechanisms protect the owner's data while releasing to analysts noisy versions of aggregate query results. But such strict protections of the individual's data have not yet found wide use in practice. Instead, Internet companies, for example, commonly provide free services in return for valuable sensitive information from users, which they exploit and sometimes sell to third parties. As awareness of the value of personal data increases, so has the drive to compensate the end-user for her private information. The idea of monetizing private data can improve over the narrower view of hiding private data, since it empowers individuals to control their data through financial means. In this article we propose a theoretical framework for assigning prices to noisy query answers as a function of their accuracy, and for dividing the price amongst data owners who deserve compensation for their loss of privacy. Our framework adopts and extends key principles from both differential privacy and query pricing in data markets. We identify essential properties of the pricing function and micropayments, and characterize valid solutions.