Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Facebook Data Breach: A Systematic Review of Its Consequences on Consumers’ Behaviour Towards Advertising

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Strategic System Assurance and Business Analytics

Part of the book series: Asset Analytics ((ASAN))

Abstract

Advancement of Internet and digitalisation of information has led to increase of data breach incidences in social networking sites (SNS) particularly Facebook, thus affecting its market value and reputation. The intriguing question is whether and how does data breach affects consumers’ behaviour towards Facebook advertising? The privacy literature provides inadequate account on this question. In order to fill the gap, the current paper analyses privacy in Facebook and investigates the consequences of perceived data breach (PDB) on consumers’ behaviour towards Facebook advertising. A systematic review of privacy literature was undertaken to answer the research question. This paper reveals that protection of consumers’ privacy in Facebook is in deficit, and it further hypothesises that PDB influences consumers’ behaviour negatively by discouraging both acceptance and engagement with ads. Moreover, PDB influences ad avoidance positively. Likewise, it influences consumers’ psychology by increasing privacy concerns and emotional violation and reducing trust concurrently. The findings of this study are not confirmatory; thus, a scope for further empirical research to test the developed model and inclusion of other mediating and moderating constructs is provided. Practically, this paper recommends tough personal data protection regulations and privacy policy that prohibit Facebook and other SNS from online tracking of consumers. Also, Facebook should build trust and revise privacy settings to enable consumers to opt in or out of receiving ads. Finally, this paper’s theoretical contribution is the model which proposes that perceived data breach affects consumers’ behaviour towards Facebook advertising both directly and indirectly through psychological mediating variables.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Malhotra NK, Kim SS, Agarwal J (2004) Internet users’ information privacy concerns (IUIPC): the construct, the scale, and a causal model. Inf Syst Res 15(4):336–355. doi 10.1287.l040.0032

    Google Scholar 

  2. PWC (2018) An overview of the changing data privacy landscape in India. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.in

  3. Sheehan KB, Hoy MG (2000) Dimensions of privacy concern among online consumers. J Public Policy Market 19(1):62–73

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dienlin T, Metzger MJ (2016) An extended privacy calculus model for snss: analyzing self-disclosure and self-withdrawal in a representative u.s. sample. J Comput-Mediated Commun 21:368–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12163

  5. Foxman ER, Kilcoyne P (1993) Marketing practice and consumer privacy: Ethical issues. J Public Policy Market 12:106–119

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gregoire Y, Robert JF (2008) Customer betrayal and retaliation: when your best customers become your worst enemies. J Acad Mark Sci 36(2):247–261

    Google Scholar 

  7. AgarwalS (2010) Bureau. Economic Times. Retrieved from|//economictimes.indiatimes.com/

    Google Scholar 

  8. Baek TH, Morimoto M (2012) Stay away from me. J Advertising 41(1):59–76. https://doi.org/10.2307/23208321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bergstrom A (2015) Online privacy concerns: a broad approach to understanding the concerns of different groups for different uses. Comput Hum Behav 53(1):419–426. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.025

  10. Smith HJ, Dinev T, Xu H (2011) Information privacy research: an interdisciplinary review. MIS Q 35(4)989–1015

    Google Scholar 

  11. Belanger F, Crossler RE (2011) Privacy in the digital age: a review of information privacy research in information systems. Manage Inf Syst Res Centre Univ Minn 35(4):1017–1041

    Google Scholar 

  12. Study finds Personal Data Protection Draft Ambiguous (2018) Economic Times. Retrieved from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/

  13. Reints R (2018) Taken a quiz lately? Your Facebook data may have been exposed. Retrieved from http://fortune.com/

  14. Hann IH, Hui KL, Lee SYT, Png IPL (2007) Overcoming online information privacy concerns: an information-processing theory approach. J Manage Inf Syst. 24(2):13–42

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chellappa RK, Sin RG (2005) Personalization versus privacy: an empirical examination of the online consumer’s dilemma. Inf Technol Manage 6:181–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Martin KD, Borah A, Palmatier R (2017) Data privacy: effects on customer and firm performance. J Market 81:36–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jm.15.0497

  17. Malhotra A, Malhotra CK (2011) Evaluating customer information breaches as service failures: an event study approach. J Serv Res 14(1):44–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670510383409

  18. Klahr R, Shah JN, Sheriffs P, Rossington T, Button M, Pestell G (2017) Cyber security breaches survey 2017. MORI Social Research Institute and Wang Institute for Criminal Justice Studies, University of Portsmouth. Retrieved from https://www.ipsos.com/

  19. Facebook (2018) Facebook reports fourth quarter and full year 2017 results. Retrieved from: https://s21.q4cdn.com/

  20. Roettgers J (2018) Facebook says it’s cutting down on viral videos as 2017 Revenue tops $40 Billion. Retrieved from http://variety.com/

  21. Sen R, Borle S (2015) Estimating the contextual risk of data breach: an empirical approach. J Manage Inf Syst 32(2):314–341. doi https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2015.1063315

  22. Badshah N. (2018) Facebook to contact 87 million users affected by data breach. The Guardian, 12 June 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com

  23. Steel E, Fowler GA (2010) Facebook in privacy breach. Wall Street J. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/

  24. Sallyann N (2018) The Facebook data leak: what happened and what’s next. Retrieved from http://www.euronews.com/t

  25. Baker SM, Gentry JW, Rittenburg TL (2005) Building understanding of the domain of consumer vulnerability J Macromark 25(2):128–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146705280622

  26. Baty E (2018) Here’s why you may be seeing a warning on your facebook newsfeed today 09 Apr 2018. Retrieved from https://www.cosmopolitan.com

  27. Give me another chance: Zuckerberg on leading Facebook. Economic Times, 08 May, 2018. Retrieved from//economictimes.indiatimes.com/

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wagner K (2018) Congress doesn’t know how Facebook works and other things we learned from Mark Zuckerberg’s testimony. Retrieved from https://www.recode.net/

  29. Jung AR (2017) The influence of perceived ad relevance on social media advertising: an empirical examination of a mediating role of privacy concern. Comput Hum Behav 70:303–309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.008

  30. Lwin M, Wirtz J, Williams JD (2007) Consumer online privacy concerns and responses: a power–responsibility equilibrium perspective. J Acad Market Sci 35:572–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-006-0003-3

  31. Tsai JY, Egelman S, Cranor L, Acquisti A (2011) The effect of online privacy information on purchasing behavior: an experimental study. Inf Syst Res 22(2):254–268. doi 10.1287.l090.0260

    Google Scholar 

  32. Nyoni P, Velempini M (2017) Privacy and user awareness on Facebook. South Afr J Sci 114(5/6/2017):2017–0103. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2018/20170103

  33. Tucker CE (2014) Social networks, personalized advertising, and privacy controls. J Market Res 51(5):546–562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmr.10.0355

  34. AcquistiA, Friedman A, Telang R (2006) Is there a cost to privacy breaches? an event study security and assurance. In: Twenty seventh international conference on information systems, Milwaukee, 2006

    Google Scholar 

  35. Milne GR, Rohm AJ, Bahl S (2004) Consumers’ protection of online privacy and identity. J Consum Aff 38(2):217–232. Accessed from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23860547

  36. Miyazaki AD, Fernandez A (2001) Consumer perceptions of privacy and security risks for online shopping. J Consum Aff 35(1):27–44

    Google Scholar 

  37. Caudill EM, Murphy PE (2000) Consumer online privacy: legal and ethical issues. J Public Policy Market 19(1):7–19

    Google Scholar 

  38. Dey K, Mondal P (2018) Social networking websites and privacy concern: a user study. Asian J Inf Sci Technol 8(1):33–38

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dwyer C, Hiltz SR, Passerine K (2007) Trust and privacy concern within social networking sites: a comparison of facebook and myspace. In: Americas conference on information systems proceedings, 2007. Retrieved from http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2007/339

  40. Zarouali B, Ponnet K, Walrave M, Poelsh K (2017) Do you like cookies? Adolescents’ sceptical processing of retargeted Facebook-ads and the moderating role of privacy concern and a textual debriefing. Comput Hum Behav 69:157–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.050

  41. Zlatolas LN, Welzer T, Hericko M, Holbl M (2015) Privacy antecedents for SNS self-disclosure: the case of Facebook. Comput Hum Behav 45:158–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Dinev T, Xu H, Smith JH, Hart P (2013) Information privacy and correlates: an empirical attempt to bridge and distinguish privacy-related concepts. Eur J Inf Syst 22:295–316

    Google Scholar 

  43. Clarke R (1999) Internet privacy concerns confirm the case for intervention. Commun ACM 42(2)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Wacks R (2010) Privacy: a very short introduction. Oxford Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1093.003.0001

    Google Scholar 

  45. Cecere G, LeGuel F, Souli N (2012) Perceived internet privacy concerns on social network in Europe. Munich Personal RePEc Archive. Retrieved from https://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de

  46. Waldo J, Lin H, Millett L (2007) Engaging privacy and information technology in a digital age. https://doi.org/10.17226/11896

  47. Westin AF (1967) Privacy and freedom. Athenaum, New

    Google Scholar 

  48. Nissenbaum H (2010) Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  49. Nill A, Aalberts RJ (2014) Legal and ethical challenges of online behavioral targeting in advertising. J Curr Issues Res Advertising 35:126–146

    Google Scholar 

  50. Jiang Z, Heng CS, Choi BCF (2013) Privacy concerns and privacy-protective behavior in synchronous online social interactions. Inf Syst Res 24(3):579–595

    Google Scholar 

  51. Wang P, Petrison LA (1993) Direct marketing activities and personal privacy. J Direct Mark 7:7–19

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ponemon Institute (2017) The impact of data breaches on reputation and share value, a study of marketers, it practitioners and consumers in the united kingdom. Retrieved from///E:/PhD/Papers/inbox/ponemon_data_breach_impact_study_uk.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  53. SO/IEC 27040 (2015) Information technology security techniques storage security. Retrieved from https://www.iso.org

  54. Gemalt D (2017) Data breaches and customer loyalty. Retrieved from https://techday.com

  55. Ablon E, Lillian H, Heaton J, Lavery Y, Romanosky S (2016) Consumer attitudes toward data breach notifications and loss of personal information. Retrieved from https://www.rand.org/

  56. Friend C, Social contract theory. Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Retrieved from https://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/

  57. Youn S (2009) Determinants of online privacy concern and its influence on privacy protection behaviors among young adolescents. J Consum Aff 43(3)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Culnan MJ, Armstrong PK (1999) Information privacy concerns, procedural fairness, and impersonal trust: an empirical investigation. Organ Sci 10(1):104–115

    Google Scholar 

  59. Hoffman DL, Novak TP, Peralta MA (2013) Information privacy in the market space: implications for the commercial uses of anonymity on the web. Inf Soc 15(2):129–139

    Google Scholar 

  60. Lewicki RJ, Bunker BB (1996) Developing and maintaining trust in work relationship in trust in organizations. In: Kramer RM, Tyler TR (eds) Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  61. Wang S, Huff L (2007) Explaining a buyer’s response to a seller’s violation of trust. Eur J Market 41(9–10):1033–1052

    Google Scholar 

  62. Feinberg F, Willer R, Stellar J, Keltner D (2012) The virtues of gossip: reputational information sharing as prosocial behavior. J Person Soc Psychol 102(5):1015–1030

    Google Scholar 

  63. Foster EK (2004) Research on gossip: taxonomy, methods, and future directions. Rev General Psychol 8(2):78–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Dunbar RIM (2004) Gossip in evolutionary perspective. Rev Gener Psychol 8(2):100–10

    Google Scholar 

  65. Baumeister RF, Zhang L, Vohs KD (2004) Gossip as cultural learning. Rev Gener Psychol 8(2):111–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Cespedes FV, Smith HJ (1993) Database marketing: new rules for policy and practice. Sloan Manage Rev 34:8–12

    Google Scholar 

  67. Hoadley CM, Xu H, Lee JJ, Rosson MB, Privacy as information access and illusory control: the case of the Facebook News Feed privacy outcry. Electron Comm Res Appl https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2009.05.00

  68. Robbin A (2001) The loss of personal privacy and its consequences for social research. J Gov Inf 28(5):493–527

    Google Scholar 

  69. Cho CH, Cheon HJ (2004) Why do people avoid advertising on the internet? J Advertising 33(4):89–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 00913367.2004.10639175

  70. Goldfarb A (2013) What is different about online advertising? Rev Ind Organ 44(2):115–129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11151-013-9399-3

  71. Kalyanaraman S, Sundar SS (2006) The psychological appeal of personalized content in web portals: does customization affect attitudes and behaviour? J Commun 56(1):110–132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460- 2466.2006.00006.x

  72. Gefen DE, Karahanna DW (2003) Trust and online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Quart 27(1)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Friedman B, Kahn P, Howe DC (2000) Trust online. Commun ACM 43(12):34–40

    Google Scholar 

  74. Sirdeshmukh DJ, Singh BS (2002) Consumer trust, value, and loyalty in relational exchanges. J Market 66:15–37

    Google Scholar 

  75. Shneiderman B (2000) Designing trust into online experiences. Commun ACM 43(12):34–40

    Google Scholar 

  76. Cohen A (2001) Internet insecurity. Time 02 July 2001

    Google Scholar 

  77. Coppola N, Hiltz SR, Rotter N (2004) Building trust in virtual teams. IEEE Trans Prof Commun 47(2):95–104

    Google Scholar 

  78. Lorenzo-Romero C, Constantinides E, Alarco´n-del-Amo M, Consumer adoption of social networking sites: implications for theory and practice. J Res Interact Market 5(2/3):170–188. https://doi.org/10.1108/17505931111187794

  79. Dennis C, Merrilees B, Jayawardhena A, Wright LT (2009) E‐consumer behaviour. Eur J Mark 43(9/10/2009):1121–1139. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560910976393

  80. Fotis JN (2015) The use of social media and its impacts on consumer behaviour: the context of holiday travel. Ph.D. thesis, Bournemouth University

    Google Scholar 

  81. Aguirre E, Mahr D, Grewel D, Ruyter KD, Wetzels M (2015) Unravelling the personalization paradox: the effect of information collection and trust-building strategies on online advertisement effectiveness. J Retail 91:34–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Myspace.com (2007) Social network advertising: making friends. new media age. London

    Google Scholar 

  83. Beersma B, Kleef GAV (2012) Why people gossip: an empirical analysis of social motives, antecedents, and consequences. J Appl Soc Psychol 42(11):2640–70

    Google Scholar 

  84. Dehghani M, Niaki MK, Ramezani I, Sali R (2016) Evaluating the influence of YouTube advertising for attraction of young customers. Comput Hum Behav 59:165–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.037

  85. Boerman SC, Kruikemeier S (2016) Consumer responses to promoted tweets sent by brands and political parties. Comput Hum Behav 65:285–294

    Google Scholar 

  86. Kelly L, Kerr G, Drennan J (2010) Avoidance of advertising in social networking sites. J Interact Advertising 10(2):16–27. doi https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.20https://doi.org/10.10722167

  87. Dewar K (2017) The value exchange: generating trust in the digital world. Bus Inf Rev 34(2):96–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/026638211771

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author is deeply grateful to Prof. Kavita Sharma and Matli Toti (Ph.D. Scholar, University of Delhi) for enormously valuable comments and suggestions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Commerce, Delhi School of Economics, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Emmanuel Elioth Lulandala

Authors
  1. Emmanuel Elioth Lulandala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuel Elioth Lulandala .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Amity Center for Interdisciplinary Research, Amity University, Noida, India

    P. K. Kapur

  2. Department of Operational Research, University of Delhi, New Delhi, Delhi, India

    Ompal Singh

  3. Amity University, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

    Sunil Kumar Khatri

  4. Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Haugesund, Norway

    Ajit Kumar Verma

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Lulandala, E.E. (2020). Facebook Data Breach: A Systematic Review of Its Consequences on Consumers’ Behaviour Towards Advertising. In: Kapur, P.K., Singh, O., Khatri, S.K., Verma, A.K. (eds) Strategic System Assurance and Business Analytics. Asset Analytics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3647-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation