skip to main content
10.1145/2841113.2841115acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesnspwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The Myth of the Average User: Improving Privacy and Security Systems through Individualization

Published:08 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

While individual differences in decision-making have been examined within the social sciences for several decades, they have only recently begun to be applied by computer scientists to examine privacy and security attitudes (and ultimately behaviors). Specifically, several researchers have shown how different online privacy decisions are correlated with the "Big Five" personality traits. In this paper, we show that the five factor model is actually a weak predictor of privacy attitudes, and that other well-studied individual differences in the psychology literature are much stronger predictors. Based on this result, we introduce the new paradigm of psychographic targeting of privacy and security mitigations: we believe that the next frontier in privacy and security research will be to tailor mitigations to users' individual differences. We explore the extensive work on choice architecture and "nudges," and discuss the possible ways it could be leveraged to improve security outcomes by personalizing privacy and security mitigations to specific user traits.

References

  1. I. Ajzen. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2):179--211, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. D. Akhawe and A. P. Felt. Alice in warningland: A large-scale field study of browser warning effectiveness. In Proceedings of the 22nd USENIX Security Symposium, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. H. Almuhimedi, F. Schaub, N. Sadeh, I. Adjerid, A. Acquisti, J. Gluck, L. Cranor, and Y. Agarwal. Your location has been shared 5,398 times! a field study on mobile app privacy nudging. Technical Report CMU-ISR-14-116, Carnegie Mellon University, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. K. C. Appelt, K. F. Milch, M. Handgraaf, and E. U. Weber. The decision making individual differences inventory and guidelines for the study of individual differences in judgment and decision-making research. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(3):252--262, April 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. M. Arianezhad, L. J. Camp, T. Kelley, and D. Stebila. Comparative eye tracking of experts and novices in web single sign-on. In Proceedings of the Third ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy, CODASPY '13, pages 105--116, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. R. Balebako, P. G. Leon, H. Almuhimedi, P. G. Kelley, J. Mugan, A. Acquisti, L. F. Cranor, and N. Sadeh. Nudging users towards privacy on mobile devices. In CHI 2011 workshop article, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. W. K. Balzer. User's manual for the Job Descriptive Index (JDI; 1997 revision) and the Job in General (JIG) scales. Bowling Green State University, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. A. Beautement, M. A. Sasse, and M. Wonham. The compliance budget: Managing security behaviour in organisations. In Proceedings of the 2008 Workshop on New Security Paradigms, NSPW '08, pages 47--58, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. A. Besmer, J. Watson, and H. R. Lipford. The impact of social navigation on privacy policy configuration. In Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS '10, pages 7:1--7:10, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A.-R. Blais and E. U. Weber. A domain-specific risk-taking (dospert) scale for adult populations. Judgment and Decision Making, 1(1):33--47, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. J. Block. A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological bulletin, 117(2):187, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. J. Blythe, J. Camp, and V. Garg. Targeted risk communication for computer security. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, IUI '11, pages 295--298, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. L. Boone and D. Kurtz. Contemporary Marketing. Cengage Learning, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. T. Buchanan, C. Paine, A. N. Joinson, and U.-D. Reips. Development of measures of online privacy concern and protection for use on the internet. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(2):157--165, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. J. T. Cacioppo, R. E. Petty, and C. Feng Kao. The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of personality assessment, 48(3):306--307, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. J. T. Cacioppo, R. E. Petty, and K. J. Morris. Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 45(4):805, 1983.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. T. L. Childers, M. J. Houston, and S. E. Heckler. Measurement of individual differences in visual versus verbal information processing. Journal of Consumer Research, pages 125--134, 1985.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. D. L. Costa and M. E. Kahn. Energy conservation "nudges" and environmentalist ideology: Evidence from a randomized residential electricity field experiment. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(3):680--702, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. P. T. Costa and R. R. McCrae. The revised neo personality inventory (neo-pi-r). The SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment, 2:179--198, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. K. E. Courtney, R. Arellano, E. Barkley-Levenson, A. Gálvan, R. A. Poldrack, J. MacKillop, J. David Jentsch, and L. A. Ray. The relationship between measures of impulsivity and alcohol misuse: an integrative structural equation modeling approach. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 36(6):923--931, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. L. F. Cranor. A framework for reasoning about the human in the loop. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Usability, Psychology, and Security, Berkeley, CA, 2008. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. S. Egelman, L. F. Cranor, and J. Hong. You've been warned: An empirical study of the effectiveness of web browser phishing warnings. In Proceeding of The 26th SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '08, pages 1065--1074, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. S. Egelman and E. Peer. Scaling the Security Wall: Developing a Security Behavior Intentions Scale (SeBIS). In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '15, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM. To appear. Pre-print available at: http://guanotronic.com/~serge/papers/chi15-sebis.pdf. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. S. Egelman and S. Schechter. The importance of being earnest {in security warnings}. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. S. Egelman, A. Sotirakopoulos, I. Muslukhov, K. Beznosov, and C. Herley. Does my password go up to eleven? the impact of password meters on password selection. In Proceedings of the ACM Computer-Human Interaction Conference, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. A. P. Felt, E. Ha, S. Egelman, A. Haney, E. Chin, and D. Wagner. Android permissions: user attention, comprehension, and behavior. In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, SOUPS '12, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. A. P. Felt, R. W. Reeder, H. Almuhimedi, and S. Consolvo. Experimenting at scale with google chrome's ssl warning. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '14, pages 2667--2670, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. D. Florencio and C. Herley. A large-scale study of web password habits. In WWW '07: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on the World Wide Web, pages 657--666, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. A. Forget, S. Komanduri, A. Acquisti, N. Christin, L. F. Cranor, and R. Telang. Security behavior observatory: Infrastructure for long-term monitoring of client machines. Technical Report CMU-CyLab-14-009, Carnegie Mellon CyLab, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. S. Frederick. Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic perspectives, pages 25--42, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. K. M. Galotti, E. Ciner, H. E. Altenbaumer, H. J. Geerts, A. Rupp, and J. Woulfe. Decision-making styles in a real-life decision: Choosing a college major. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(4):629--639, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. V. Garg, L. J. Camp, K. Connelly, and L. Lorenzen-Huber. Risk communication design: Video vs. text. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, PETS'12, pages 279--298, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. D. G. Goldstein, E. J. Johnson, and W. F. Sharpe. Choosing outcomes versus choosing products: Consumer-focused retirement investment advice. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3):440--456, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. S. D. Gosling, P. J. Rentfrow, and W. B. Swann Jr. A very brief measure of the big-five personality domains. J. of Research in Personality, 37(6):504--528, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. L. Gou, M. X. Zhou, and H. Yang. Knowme and shareme: Understanding automatically discovered personality traits from social media and user sharing preferences. In Proc. of the 32nd Annual ACM Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '14, pages 955--964, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. C. P. Haugtvedt, R. E. Petty, and J. T. Cacioppo. Need for cognition and advertising: Understanding the role of personality variables in consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 1(3):239--260, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. D. L. Hoffman, P. K. Kopalle, and T. P. Novak. The "right" consumers for better concepts: Identifying consumers high in emergent nature to develop new product concepts. Journal of Marketing Research, 47(5):854--865, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. L. M. Hough. The `big five' personality variables--construct confusion: Description versus prediction. Human Performance, 5(1-2):139--155, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. S. Issenberg. Born This Way. New York Magazine, April 12 2012. http://nymag.com/news/features/liberals-conservatives-2012-4/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. D. Jeske, L. Coventry, P. Briggs, and A. van Moorsel. Nudging whom how: It proficiency, impulse control and secure behaviour. Networks, 49:18, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. L. K. John, A. Acquisti, and G. Loewenstein. Strangers on a plane: context-dependent willingness to divulge sensitive information. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(5):858--873, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. E. J. Johnson and D. Goldstein. Do defaults save lives? Science, 302(5649):1338--1339, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. E. J. Johnson, S. B. Shu, B. G. Dellaert, C. Fox, D. G. Goldstein, G. Häubl, R. P. Larrick, J. W. Payne, E. Peters, D. Schkade, et al. Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture. Marketing Letters, 23(2):487--504, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. J. Joireman, M. J. Shaffer, D. Balliet, and A. Strathman. Promotion orientation explains why future-oriented people exercise and eat healthy evidence from the two-factor consideration of future consequences-14 scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(10):1272--1287, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. T. A. Judge and J. E. Bono. Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of applied psychology, 85(5):751, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. I. A. Junglas, N. A. Johnson, and C. Spitzmuller. Personality traits and concern for privacy: an empirical study in the context of location-based services. European Journal of Information Systems, 17(4):387--402, print 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. T. Kelley, L. J. Camp, S. Lien, and D. Stebila. Self-identified experts lost on the interwebs: The importance of treating all results as learning experiences. In Proceedings of the 2012 Workshop on Learning from Authoritative Security Experiment Results, LASER '12, pages 47--54, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. M. L. Korzaan and K. T. Boswell. The influence of personality traits and information privacy concerns on behavioral intentions. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48(4):15--24, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. P. Kotler and K. Keller. Marketing Management. Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. P. Kumaraguru and L. F. Cranor. Privacy indexes: A survey of westin's studies. Technical Report CMU-ISRI-5-138, Carnegie Mellon University, December 2005. http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/anon/isri2005/CMU-ISRI-05-138.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. P. Kumaraguru and L. F. Cranor. Privacy Indexes: A Survey of Westin's Studies. Technical Report CMU-ISRI-5-138, Carnegie Mellon University, December, 2005. http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/anon/isri2005/abstracts/05-138.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. I. P. Levin, G. J. Gaeth, J. Schreiber, and M. Lauriola. A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88(1):411--429, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. I. P. Levin, S. L. Schneider, and G. J. Gaeth. All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 76(2):149--188, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. I. M. Lipkus, G. Samsa, and B. K. Rimer. General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making, 21(1):37--44, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. D. J. MacInnis, C. Moorman, and B. J. Jaworski. Enhancing and measuring consumers' motivation, opportunity, and ability to process brand information from ads. The J. of Marketing, pages 32--53, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. B. C. Madrian and D. F. Shea. The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401 (k) participation and savings behavior. Technical report, National bureau of economic research, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. N. K. Malhotra, S. S. Kim, and J. Agarwal. Internet users' information privacy concerns (iuipc): The construct, the scale, and a causal model. Information Systems Research, 15(4):336--355, December 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. A. Martins, N. Ramalho, and E. Morin. A comprehensive meta-analysis of the relationship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and individual differences, 49(6):554--564, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. M. Matsunaga. How to factor-analyze your data right: Do's, don'ts, and how-to's. International Journal of Psychological Research, 3(1):97--110, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. A. M. McDonald and L. F. Cranor. Americans' attitudes about internet behavioral advertising practices. In Proceedings of the 9th annual ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society, WPES '10, pages 63--72, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. A. M. McDonald and L. F. Cranor. Beliefs and behaviors: Internet users' understanding of behavioral advertising. In 38th Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy (Telecommunications Policy Research Conference), October 2 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. O. H. Mowrer. Learning theory and behavior. John Wiley & Sons Inc, 1960.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. D. A. Norman. The way i see it: When security gets in the way. interactions, 16(6):60--63, Nov. 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. J. H. Patton, M. S. Stanford, et al. Factor structure of the barratt impulsiveness scale. Journal of clinical psychology, 51(6):768--774, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. D. M. Pedersen. Personality correlates of privacy. The Journal of Psychology, 112(1):11--14, 1982.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  66. E. Peters, D. Västfjäll, P. Slovic, C. Mertz, K. Mazzocco, and S. Dickert. Numeracy and decision making. Psychological Science, 17(5):407--413, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  67. R. W. Reeder, L. Bauer, L. F. Cranor, M. K. Reiter, K. Bacon, K. How, and H. Strong. Expandable grids for visualizing and authoring computer security policies. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '08, pages 1473--1482, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. V. F. Reyna, W. L. Nelson, P. K. Han, and N. F. Dieckmann. How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychological bulletin, 135(6):943, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. M. K. Rothbart, S. A. Ahadi, and D. E. Evans. Temperament and personality: origins and outcomes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 78(1):122, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. R. J. Schneider and L. M. Hough. Personality and industrial/organizational psychology. International review of industrial and organizational psychology, 10:75--130, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. S. G. Scott and R. A. Bruce. Decision-making style: The development and assessment of a new measure. Educational and psychological measurement, 55(5):818--831, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. S. M. Smith and I. P. Levin. Need for cognition and choice framing effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9(4):283--290, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. W. R. Smith. Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. Journal of Marketing, 21(1):pp. 3--8, 1956.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. A. Sotirakopoulos, K. Hawkey, and K. Beznosov. On the challenges in usable security lab studies: Lessons learned from replicating a study on ssl warnings. In Proceedings of the 2011 Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS '11), Jun 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  75. K. E. Stanovich and R. F. West. Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of experimental psychology: general, 127(2):161, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. R. Strahan and K. C. Gerbasi. Short, homogeneous versions of the marlowe-crowne social desirability scale. Journal of clinical psychology, 1972.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. J. Sunshine, S. Egelman, H. Almuhimedi, N. Atri, and L. F. Cranor. Crying wolf: an empirical study of ssl warning effectiveness. In Proceedings of the 18th USENIX Security Symposium, SSYM'09, pages 399--416, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2009. USENIX Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. R. Thaler and C. Sunstein. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. A. Tversky and D. Kahneman. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481):453--458, January 1981.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  80. United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team. Tips. https://www.us-cert.gov/ncas/tips. Accessed: September 12, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  81. B. Ur, P. G. Leon, L. F. Cranor, R. Shay, and Y. Wang. Smart, useful, scary, creepy: perceptions of online behavioral advertising. In Proceedings of the Eighth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, page 4. ACM, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  82. Verizon. Security. http://www.verizon.com/Support/Residential/Internet/FiosInternet/General+Support/Security/Security.htm, 2014. Accessed: September 12, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Y. Wang, P. G. Leon, A. Acquisti, L. F. Cranor, A. Forget, and N. Sadeh. A field trial of privacy nudges for facebook. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 2367--2376. ACM, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Y. Wang, P. G. Leon, X. Chen, S. Komanduri, G. Norcie, K. Scott, A. Acquisti, L. F. Cranor, and N. Sadeh. The second wave of global privacy protection: From facebook regrets to facebook privacy nudges. Ohio State Law Journal, 74:1307--1335, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. Y. Wang, P. G. Leon, K. Scott, X. Chen, A. Acquisti, and L. F. Cranor. Privacy nudges for social media: an exploratory facebook study. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on World Wide Web companion, pages 763--770. International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  86. M. S. Wogalter. Communication-Human Information Processing (C-HIP) Model. In M. S. Wogalter, editor, Handbook of Warnings, pages 51--61. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  87. A. Woodruff, V. Pihur, S. Consolvo, L. Brandimarte, and A. Acquisti. Would a privacy fundamentalist sell their dna for $1000...if nothing bad happened as a result? the westin categories, behavioral intentions, and consequences. In Proceedings of the 2014 Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security, pages 1--18. USENIX Association, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  88. M. Wu, R. C. Miller, and S. L. Garfinkel. Do security toolbars actually prevent phishing attacks? In CHI '06: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 601--610, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. H. Xu, T. Dinev, J. Smith, and P. Hart. Information privacy concerns: Linking individual perceptions with institutional privacy assurances. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 12(12):1, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  90. H. Xu, X. R. Luo, J. M. Carroll, and M. B. Rosson. The personalization privacy paradox: An exploratory study of decision making process for location-aware marketing. Decision Support Systems, 51(1):42--52, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  91. J. Yan, N. Liu, G. Wang, W. Zhang, Y. Jiang, and Z. Chen. How much can behavioral targeting help online advertising? In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web, pages 261--270. ACM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  92. J. Zaslow. If tivo thinks you are gay, here's how to set it straight. The Wall Street Journal, 2002. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1038261936872356908.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. Y. Zhang and R. Buda. Moderating effects of need for cognition on responses to positively versus negatively framed advertising messages. Journal of Advertising, 28(2):1--15, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  94. M. E. Zurko and R. T. Simon. User-centered security. In NSPW '96: Proceedings of the 1996 Workshop on New Security Paradigms, pages 27--33, New York, NY, USA, 1996. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  1. The Myth of the Average User: Improving Privacy and Security Systems through Individualization

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      NSPW '15: Proceedings of the 2015 New Security Paradigms Workshop
      September 2015
      163 pages
      ISBN:9781450337540
      DOI:10.1145/2841113

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 8 September 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate62of170submissions,36%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader