"Whether to Read or Not to Read": Assessing the Relative Impact of "Reasons For" and "Reasons Against" Reading Privacy Policies Using Behavioural Reasoning Theory.
Saved in:
| Title: | "Whether to Read or Not to Read": Assessing the Relative Impact of "Reasons For" and "Reasons Against" Reading Privacy Policies Using Behavioural Reasoning Theory. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Mohan, Neethu (AUTHOR), K. A., Zakkariya (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction. Dec2025, Vol. 41 Issue 24, p15409-15422. 14p. |
| Subjects: | Privacy, Internet users, Digital literacy, Decision theory, Reading motivation |
| Abstract: | In this study, Behavioural Reasoning Theory (BRT) is applied as a neoteric approach to examine the intention of internet users to read privacy policies before accessing online services. The present study assesses the relative impact of "reasons for' and "reasons against" reading an online privacy policy. A sample of 571 respondents were used to test the hypothesized relationships based on the BRT empirically using PLS-SEM. Findings indicate a significant positive relationship between "reasons for" and both attitude and intention towards reading. Conversely, "reasons against" exhibit a negative association with reading intention. Privacy concerns demonstrated a positive influence on "reasons for" and a negative influence on "reasons against". Furthermore, the moderating role of internet knowledge on these hypothesized relationships was examined. Insights from the study can be useful for government policymakers, service providers, and service users seeking to enhance user interaction with privacy information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
Be the first to leave a comment!
