Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life

By Helen Nissenbaum. 2009

2,665 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/abb826f40ce51ffb1154231640c35537faa0712e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Where are human subjects in Big Data research? The emerging ethics divide (2016, background): “The range of harms made possible by data analytics extremely hard to fore-see and delimit (Andrejevic, 2014; Michael and Miller, 2013; Nissenbaum 2009, 2011; Polonetsky et al., 2015).”
Children’s understanding of personal data and privacy online – a systematic evidence mapping (2019, background): “…privacy as contextual integrity, meaning ‘neither a right to secrecy nor a right to control, but a right to appropriate flow of personal information’ (Nissenbaum, 2010, p. 3) in order to grasp the relational nature of privacy generated through interactions among people and/or organisations in…”
Privacy Regulation and Market Structure (2015, background): “In a variety of industries, the law literature discusses many possible reasons to favor regulatory protection of consumer privacy (Nissenbaum, 2010; Zittrain, 2008).”
Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media (2014, background): “Nissenbaum (2010) describes such contexts as “spheres of trust,” she writes, “the parent chooses not to read the child’s journal, even though he knows where the journal is kept, as this would not only violate a principle of transmission but would undermine the bonds of trust” (pp. 240–241). seek to…”
Social Injustice in Surveillance Capitalism (2017, background): “…in a legal sense, enacted via cryptically written end user license agreements and hardto-find ‘data privacy’ and ‘data protection’ policies typically designed to do just the opposite—provide a legal basis for separating users from their personal data (Nissenbaum 2010; Tene and Polonetsky 2012).”
Critical Perspectives on Governance Mechanisms for AI/ML Systems (2020, background): “Philosophers and social theorists of technology such as Nissenbaum (2010), Gandy (2009), Johnson (2007), Pfaffenberger (1992), and Winner (1988) have variously argued technical speciﬁcations can and should be only one element of a broader, multidisciplinary assessment of digital technologies and…”
Influence of Social Support Received in Online and Offline Contexts on Satisfaction With Social Support and Satisfaction With Life: A Longitudinal Study (2015, background): “The collapse of contexts requires a request for emotional support to fit to very different recipients from different social groups and with a variety of role expectations (Nissenbaum, 2010; Vitak, 2012).”
The limits of transparency: Data brokers and commodification (2018, background): “Certain recent proposals seek to expand the scope of transparency beyond disclosure toward strategies that approximate what Nissenbaum (2010) calls “contextual integrity.””
How to Design AI for Social Good: Seven Essential Factors (2020, background): “…is considered to be an essential condition for safety, human dignity, and social cohesion, among other things (Solove 2008), and because earlier waves of digital technology have already had a major impact 1 3 How to Design AI for Social Good: Seven Essential Factors on privacy (Nissenbaum 2009).”
Ten simple rules for responsible big data research (2017, background): “Breaches of privacy are key means by which big data research can do harm, and it is important to recognize that privacy is contextual [11] and situational [12], not reducible to a simple Ten Simple Rules for Responsible Big Data Research”
Privacy for All: Ensuring Fair and Equitable Privacy Protections (2018, background): “Legal philosopher Charles Fried argues for control theory as superior to limitation theory, stating ”Privacy is not simply an absence of information about us in the minds of others, rather it is the control we have over information about ourselves” (Nissenbaum, 2009).”
No Encore for Encore? Ethical questions for web-based censorship measurement (2015, background): “According to Nissenbaum’s theory of contextual integrity, “what people care most about is not simply restricting the flow of information but ensuring that it flows appropriately [61].””
Addressing Privacy Threats from Machine Learning (2021, background): “Although a variety of definitions, frameworks, and taxonomies have been proposed, there is no single, universally agreed-upon definition of privacy (Solove, 2008; Nissenbaum, 2009; Arora, 2019; McDonald and Forte, 2020).”
Counteracting the Negative Effect of Form Auto-completion on the Privacy Calculus (2013, background): “Note that the idea of purpose specificity may be related to Nissenbaum’s concept of contextual integrity (Nissenbaum 2004, 2010).”
Communicating Algorithmic Process in Online Behavioral Advertising (2018, background): “Most algorithmic decision-making systems do not communicate their inner workings to users [39], resulting in information asymmetry—a disparity in what is visible to different parties to a system [34].”