See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263565832
Privacy Online
Chapter · January 2011
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-21521-6_3
CITATIONS READS
45 1,477
5 authors, including:
Nicole B Ellison Jessica Vitak
University of Michigan University of Maryland, College Park
76 PUBLICATIONS 16,719 CITATIONS 43 PUBLICATIONS 1,618 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Charles W Steinfield Rebecca Gray
Michigan State University Michigan State University
137 PUBLICATIONS 11,301 CITATIONS 13 PUBLICATIONS 592 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Boundary spanning over enterprise social media View project
Participatory video as an approach to smallholder farmer education in developing countries View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Jessica Vitak on 10 February 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
,
Chapter 3
Negotiating Privacy Concerns and Social Capital
Needs in a Social Media Environment
Nicole B. Ellison, Jessica Vitak, Charles Steinfield, Rebecca Gray, and Cliff
Lampe
3.1 Introduction
Social network sites (SNSs) are becoming an increasingly popular resource for both
students and adults, who use them to connect with and maintain relationships with a
variety of ties. For many, the primary function of these sites is to consume and
distribute personal content about the self. Privacy concerns around sharing information
in a public or semi-public space are amplified by SNSs’ structural characteristics,
which may obfuscate the true audience of these disclosures due to their technical
properties (e.g., persistence, searchability) and dynamics of use (e.g., invisible
audiences, context collapse) (boyd, 2008b). Early work on the topic focused on the
privacy pitfalls of Facebook and other SNSs (e.g., Acquisti & Gross, 2006; Barnes,
2006; Gross & Acquisti, 2005) and argued that individuals were (perhaps
inadvertently) disclosing information that might be inappropriate for some audiences,
such as future employers, or that might enable identity theft or other negative
outcomes.
The focus of this early work on negative outcomes of use, in the absence of research
that considered motivations for use, presented a confusing portrait of the Facebook
user. Our initial research exploring the “benefits of Facebook Friends” (Ellison,
Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007) was inspired by the discrepancy between high usage
patterns and a focus on negative outcomes. Our research has employed the social
capital framework as a way of exploring the positive outcomes of SNS use. A stream
of research by the authors has explored social capital outcomes of Facebook use
(Ellison et al., 2007; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, in press; Ellison, Steinfield, Lampe,
& Vitak, 2010; Steinfield, DiMicco, Ellison & Lampe, 2009). The social capital
approach has been replicated in other contexts, such as Valenzuela, Park, and Kee’s
(2009) study of Facebook use and civic engagement.
,
One question not yet addressed by scholarship in this area is the relationship between
privacy and social capital outcomes. Our conception of privacy speaks to the ability of
individuals to control when, to what extent, and how information about the self is
communicated to others (see Westin, 1967; see also chapter 2 of this volume for a
further elaboration on theories of privacy by Margulis). In many cases, disclosing
information about the self is necessary in order to reap the benefits from these
technological tools. After all, members of one’s social network cannot suggest a new
job possibility if they do not know s/he is looking, nor can they offer social support if
they do not know it is needed. By lowering the barriers to communicating with a wider
network of weak ties (Donath & boyd, 2004; Ellison et al., 2007), SNSs enable
individuals to broadcast requests for support or information. Self-disclosure is also a
means by which individuals learn about and develop relationships with one another
(Berger & Calabrese, 1975); however, this process entails revealing information about
the self that one might not want to share with a wider audience.
This chapter will consider how SNS users balance the desire to share personal
information (and thus potentially accrue the social capital benefits associated with
disclosure) and the need to control these disclosures (by minimizing the risks
associated with sharing private information). We describe three strategies by which
users can control the audience for their disclosures on SNSs: Friending behaviors,
managing audiences via privacy settings, and disclosures on the site. Below we briefly
discuss social capital, privacy, and information disclosure on SNSs before presenting
some preliminary findings about SNS privacy behaviors and social capital.
3.2 Literature Review: Overview of Social Capital
The concept of social capital has received considerable attention across numerous
disciplines over the past three decades (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Social capital broadly
refers to the accumulated resources derived from the relationships among people
within a specific social context or network (Bourdieu, 2001; Coleman, 1988; Lin,
2001; Portes, 1998; Putnam, 2000). Some have expressed concern that the concept
lacks theoretical and operational rigor—for example, Portes (1998) notes that
conceptualizations of social capital can alternatively refer to the mechanisms that
generate it (the relationships between people) or its outcomes (the resources one may
obtain from these relationships). We emphasize social capital as an outcome that stems
from relationships among people. Hence, being embedded in a network of
relationships is a necessary precursor of social capital, but in and of itself is not
synonymous with social capital.
Privacy Online
Chapter · January 2011
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-21521-6_3
CITATIONS READS
45 1,477
5 authors, including:
Nicole B Ellison Jessica Vitak
University of Michigan University of Maryland, College Park
76 PUBLICATIONS 16,719 CITATIONS 43 PUBLICATIONS 1,618 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Charles W Steinfield Rebecca Gray
Michigan State University Michigan State University
137 PUBLICATIONS 11,301 CITATIONS 13 PUBLICATIONS 592 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Boundary spanning over enterprise social media View project
Participatory video as an approach to smallholder farmer education in developing countries View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Jessica Vitak on 10 February 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
,
Chapter 3
Negotiating Privacy Concerns and Social Capital
Needs in a Social Media Environment
Nicole B. Ellison, Jessica Vitak, Charles Steinfield, Rebecca Gray, and Cliff
Lampe
3.1 Introduction
Social network sites (SNSs) are becoming an increasingly popular resource for both
students and adults, who use them to connect with and maintain relationships with a
variety of ties. For many, the primary function of these sites is to consume and
distribute personal content about the self. Privacy concerns around sharing information
in a public or semi-public space are amplified by SNSs’ structural characteristics,
which may obfuscate the true audience of these disclosures due to their technical
properties (e.g., persistence, searchability) and dynamics of use (e.g., invisible
audiences, context collapse) (boyd, 2008b). Early work on the topic focused on the
privacy pitfalls of Facebook and other SNSs (e.g., Acquisti & Gross, 2006; Barnes,
2006; Gross & Acquisti, 2005) and argued that individuals were (perhaps
inadvertently) disclosing information that might be inappropriate for some audiences,
such as future employers, or that might enable identity theft or other negative
outcomes.
The focus of this early work on negative outcomes of use, in the absence of research
that considered motivations for use, presented a confusing portrait of the Facebook
user. Our initial research exploring the “benefits of Facebook Friends” (Ellison,
Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007) was inspired by the discrepancy between high usage
patterns and a focus on negative outcomes. Our research has employed the social
capital framework as a way of exploring the positive outcomes of SNS use. A stream
of research by the authors has explored social capital outcomes of Facebook use
(Ellison et al., 2007; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, in press; Ellison, Steinfield, Lampe,
& Vitak, 2010; Steinfield, DiMicco, Ellison & Lampe, 2009). The social capital
approach has been replicated in other contexts, such as Valenzuela, Park, and Kee’s
(2009) study of Facebook use and civic engagement.
,
One question not yet addressed by scholarship in this area is the relationship between
privacy and social capital outcomes. Our conception of privacy speaks to the ability of
individuals to control when, to what extent, and how information about the self is
communicated to others (see Westin, 1967; see also chapter 2 of this volume for a
further elaboration on theories of privacy by Margulis). In many cases, disclosing
information about the self is necessary in order to reap the benefits from these
technological tools. After all, members of one’s social network cannot suggest a new
job possibility if they do not know s/he is looking, nor can they offer social support if
they do not know it is needed. By lowering the barriers to communicating with a wider
network of weak ties (Donath & boyd, 2004; Ellison et al., 2007), SNSs enable
individuals to broadcast requests for support or information. Self-disclosure is also a
means by which individuals learn about and develop relationships with one another
(Berger & Calabrese, 1975); however, this process entails revealing information about
the self that one might not want to share with a wider audience.
This chapter will consider how SNS users balance the desire to share personal
information (and thus potentially accrue the social capital benefits associated with
disclosure) and the need to control these disclosures (by minimizing the risks
associated with sharing private information). We describe three strategies by which
users can control the audience for their disclosures on SNSs: Friending behaviors,
managing audiences via privacy settings, and disclosures on the site. Below we briefly
discuss social capital, privacy, and information disclosure on SNSs before presenting
some preliminary findings about SNS privacy behaviors and social capital.
3.2 Literature Review: Overview of Social Capital
The concept of social capital has received considerable attention across numerous
disciplines over the past three decades (Adler & Kwon, 2002). Social capital broadly
refers to the accumulated resources derived from the relationships among people
within a specific social context or network (Bourdieu, 2001; Coleman, 1988; Lin,
2001; Portes, 1998; Putnam, 2000). Some have expressed concern that the concept
lacks theoretical and operational rigor—for example, Portes (1998) notes that
conceptualizations of social capital can alternatively refer to the mechanisms that
generate it (the relationships between people) or its outcomes (the resources one may
obtain from these relationships). We emphasize social capital as an outcome that stems
from relationships among people. Hence, being embedded in a network of
relationships is a necessary precursor of social capital, but in and of itself is not
synonymous with social capital.
