Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Vishwanath, A."
  • × theme_ss:"Internet"
  1. Vishwanath, A.; Chen, H.: Personal communication technologies as an extension of the self : a cross-cultural comparison of people's associations with technology and their symbolic proximity with others (2008) 0.00
    0.002269176 = product of:
      0.004538352 = sum of:
        0.004538352 = product of:
          0.009076704 = sum of:
            0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 2355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009076704 = score(doc=2355,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2355, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2355)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Increasingly, individuals use communication technologies such as e-mail, IMs, blogs, and cell phones to locate, learn about, and communicate with one another. Not much, however, is known about how individuals relate to various personal technologies, their preferences for each, or their extensional associations with them. Even less is known about the cultural differences in these preferences. The current study used the Galileo system of multidimensional scaling to systematically map the extensional associations with nine personal communication technologies across three cultures: U.S., Germany, and Singapore. Across the three cultures, the technologies closest to the self were similar, suggesting a universality of associations with certain technologies. In contrast, the technologies farther from the self were significantly different across cultures. Moreover, the magnitude of associations with each technology differed based on the extensional association or distance from the self. Also, and more importantly, the antecedents to these associations differed significantly across cultures, suggesting a stronger influence of cultural norms on personal-technology choice.
    Type
    a
  2. Vishwanath, A.; Xu, W.; Ngoh, Z.: How people protect their privacy on facebook : a cost-benefit view (2018) 0.00
    0.0022374375 = product of:
      0.004474875 = sum of:
        0.004474875 = product of:
          0.00894975 = sum of:
            0.00894975 = weight(_text_:a in 4223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00894975 = score(doc=4223,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 4223, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4223)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Realizing the many benefits from Facebook require users to share information reciprocally, which has overtime created trillions of bytes of information online-a treasure trove for cybercriminals. The sole protection for any user are three sets of privacy protections afforded by Facebook: settings that control information privacy (i.e., security of social media accounts and identity information), accessibility privacy or anonymity (i.e., manage who can connect with a user), and those that control expressive privacy (i.e., control who can see a user's posts and tag you). Using these settings, however, involves a trade-off between making oneself accessible and thereby vulnerable to potential attacks, or enacting stringent protections that could potentially make someone inaccessible thereby reducing the benefits that are accruable through social media. Using two theoretical frameworks, Uses and Gratifications (U&G) and Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), the research examined how individuals congitvely juxtaposed the cost of maintaining privacy through the use of these settings against the benefits of openness. The application of the U&G framework revealed that social need fulfillment was the single most significant benefit driving privacy management. From the cost standpoint, the PMT framework pointed to perceived severity impacting expressive and information privacy, and perceived susceptability influencing accessibility privacy.
    Type
    a

Authors