User Preferences for Interdependent Privacy Preservation Strategies in Social Media

Abstract

Interdependent privacy (IDP) violations occur when users share personal information about others without permission, resulting in potential embarrassment, reputation loss, or harassment. There are several strategies that can be applied to protect IDP, but little is known regarding how social media users perceive IDP threats or how they prefer to respond to them. We utilized a mixed-method approach with a replication study to examine user beliefs about various government-, platform-, and user-level strategies for managing IDP violations. Participants reported that IDP represented a 'serious' online threat, and identified themselves as primarily responsible for responding to violations. IDP strategies that felt more familiar and provided greater perceived control over violations (e.g., flagging, blocking, unfriending) were rated as more effective than platform or government driven interventions. Furthermore, we found users were more willing to share on social media if they perceived their interactions as protected. Findings are discussed in relation to control paradox theory.