A Study on the Universality and Differences of Privacy Paradox

Behavior from a Gender Perspective

Yihan Wang

and Yi Xu

2,*

School of Journalism and Communication, Changchun University of Technology, 130012 Jilin, China

School of Communication, Nanjing Xiaozhuang College, 211171 Jiangsu, China

Keywords: Social Media Influence, Digitalization and New Media, User Behavior, Privacy Paradox.

Abstract: Users are extremely concerned about privacy disclosure issues in current social media. However, some users

still disclose personal information on social media, and this paradoxical behavior has triggered reflection and

exploration in the academic community. This study will explore the universality and differences of privacy

paradox behavior between male and female gender groups from the perspectives of privacy concerns, privacy

awareness, risk perception, benefit perception, and disclosure behavior. It will use literature review,

questionnaire survey, and data analysis methods to further investigate the potential impact of gender on

privacy paradox behavior in different aspects. Research findings indicate that, in terms of universality, both

men and women are relatively concerned about personal privacy on social media, while also exhibiting

paradoxical behavior in disclosing personal information. In terms of differences, the study shows that women

are more willing to disclose personal information on social media than men. The research findings provide a

theoretical basis for various social media platforms to improve their privacy protection policies to some extent

and promote the development of more personalized privacy protection policies for different gender groups.

1 INTRODUCTION

With the continuous upgrade of the internet and the

rapid development of smart devices, the data

generated by people using various apps is showing a

geometric increase in both quantity and variety,

indicating that the era of big data has arrived (Zhang

& Xie, 2022). According to the 53rd Statistical

Report on China's Internet Development by the China

Internet Network Information Center, as of June

2024, the number of internet users in China is nearly

1.1 billion (1.09967 billion), an increase of 7.42

million from December 2023, with an internet

penetration rate of 78.0%. However, at the same time,

with increasingly advanced technology, the

efficiency of collecting, storing, and analyzing large

amounts of user information has undoubtedly

improved. Social media platforms are increasingly

leveraging the ability to collect and analyze user

information, leading to serious concerns about

potential violations of personal privacy (Norberg et

al., 2007). Research at home and abroad shows that

most social media users are aware of the significant

* Corresponding author

risk of privacy breaches when using internet

platforms, yet they still have the willingness to share

personal privacy information on social media (Zhang

& Li, 2023). This has led to the behavior of the

‘privacy paradox’, where social media users still

disclose information despite being aware of the risks

of leakage.

This study focuses on the privacy paradox

behavior of social media users, which mainly refers

to the constant risk of privacy leakage that everyone

faces, and this has also raised concerns about privacy

security. However, concerns and worries about

privacy rarely affect people's actual behavior, and this

contradictory phenomenon between privacy attitudes

and privacy behaviors is called the ‘privacy paradox’

(Xiao, 2022). For example, people post a lot of

personal information on social media, such as

birthdays and addresses, even though they know that

this increases the risk of personal information

leakage; they still choose to do so due to the need for

social interaction.

The lack of awareness regarding information

protection in the process of online communication on

Wang, Y. and Xu, Y.

A Study on the Universality and Differences of Privacy Paradox Behavior from a Gender Perspective.

DOI: 10.5220/0014113900004942

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Applied Psychology and Marketing Management (APMM 2025), pages 357-363

ISBN: 978-989-758-791-7

357

the contemporary internet may lead to the

indiscriminate disclosure of personal privacy, which,

while highlighting individual characteristics, also

triggers a more prominent risk of information

leakage. Although the risk of privacy information

leakage mentioned above has been given some

attention by social media users, the conceptual

awareness cannot truly be converted into actual

action, thereby leading to the problem of the privacy

paradox.

The privacy paradox behavior of social media

users is often influenced by gender differences. This

study focuses on the general and varied expressions

between male and female groups from several

perspectives, including privacy concern, privacy

cognition, risk perception, benefit perception, and

disclosure behavior, which can provide certain

references for internet platforms to more effectively

offer privacy protection services tailored to users of

different genders.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

As early as 2001, researchers like Spiekermann found

that most users expressed that privacy was important

to them; however, regardless of their specific privacy

concerns, once people went online, they tended to

overlook privacy issues (Spiekemann et al., 2001).

Barner studied in 2006 how teenagers, driven by

social needs, have privacy concerns about online

platforms but still disclose information (Bames,

2006). So far, a series of studies have confirmed that

although social media users are genuinely concerned

about the privacy and security issues brought by the

platform, this concern has little impact on their own

privacy disclosure behaviors. The phenomenon of

this inconsistency between privacy attitudes and

privacy behaviors is known as the privacy paradox

(Liu, 2018). Zhang Dewen and others explain the

causes of privacy paradox behavior by building a

model in their article. The research shows that there

are moderating effects between privacy concerns and

privacy disclosure among social media users under

different genders, sample groups, and cultural

backgrounds (Zhang et al., 2024). This article will

focus on the gender perspective, studying the

commonalities between the two different gender

groups, male and female, in terms of privacy attitudes

and privacy behaviors. It will also investigate,

through surveys and data analysis, the differences in

how gender factors affect males and females,

supplementing the existing academic gap.

3 RESEARCH METHODS

A questionnaire survey will be set up based on

privacy concerns, awareness, risk perception, benefit

perception, disclosure behavior, etc. The

questionnaire will cover a large sample range to

ensure that the final research results are universal. At

the same time, based on the research question, namely

the prevalence and differences of privacy paradox

behaviors from a gender perspective, the expected

results need to be presented in quantitative form.

Furthermore, descriptive statistical analysis is

needed, so the questionnaire method is judged to be

feasible.

3.1 Questionnaire Design

The data for this study comes from a questionnaire

survey using a questionnaire tool called

“Wenjuanxing”. After distributing questionnaires to

217 respondents from different regions and excluding

invalid data, the specific distribution of the

respondents is as follows: There are 217 people in

total, including 108 males, accounting for 49.8%, and

109 females, accounting for 50.2%.

The specific underlying logic of the questionnaire

is to quantify the user's awareness of privacy

protection and the user's actual level of privacy

protection by assigning score values 1-5 to options.

The higher the value, the stronger the awareness of

privacy protection and the more rigorous the privacy

protection measures. The questions mainly involve

two aspects. For different genders, on the one hand,

the questions focus on the awareness of privacy

protection, such as the fifth question "Will you click

on links in social media including but not limited to

comment areas and advertisements?", the seventh

question "What is your attitude towards interacting

with strangers on social media?" and the twelfth

question "When social media asks you to provide

your personal information, what is your choice?".

These three questions approach the issue from three

angles: unknown links such as advertisements, other

users in the media, and the social media platforms

themselves. Based on the respondents' attitudes, the

options are converted into corresponding values, so

that the respondents' attitudes towards their own

privacy protection can be quantified. These three

questions reflect, to a certain extent, the extent to

which social media users’ awareness of protecting

their own information is transformed into actual

actions. The fourth question, "How often do you share

personal information on social media?" will continue

to explore in depth the differences between men and

APMM 2025 - International Conference on Applied Psychology and Marketing Management

358

women and the reasons for leaking information based

on the first two aspects.

3.2 Data Analysis Methods

Mean analysis and variance analysis in descriptive

statistical analysis can present basic information of

the questionnaire, such as gender ratio, age ratio, and

the proportion of people choosing the options for the

questions, including the central trend of the data, data

distribution, etc., and display the data intuitively.

Mean analysis can help you quickly understand the

overall level of the data, and can also make

preliminary predictions for unobserved data based on

the mean. The p-value difference test can determine

whether there is a statistically significant difference

between two data sets, providing a basis for

understanding the practical significance of the

difference.

4 RESEARCH RESULTS

The information obtained from the questionnaire was

organized into the following table, and corresponding

values were assigned to the options. Based on SPSS,

the maximum value, minimum value, mean value,

standard deviation, and median of the sample are

calculated, and the following table is obtained.

Table 1: Basic indicators of the sample.

fundamental indicators

name ample size minimum maximum average

standard

deviation

median

gender 217 1.000 2.000 1.502 0.501 2.000

2*2. What is your age range? 217 1.000 4.000 1.802 0.904 2.000

3*3. Approximately how

much time do you spend on social

media each da

217 1.000 5.000 3.074 0.935 3.000

4*4. How often do you share

ersonal information on social

media?

217 1.000 5.000 3.539 1.110 4.000

5*5. Will you click on links in

social media that include, but are

not limited to, comment sections,

advertisements?

217 1.000 5.000 3.848 1.221 4.000

6*6. Have you ever been

troubled by the risk of privacy

leaks on a social media platform?

217 1.000 5.000 2.138 1.367 2.000

7*7. What is your attitude

towards interacting with strangers

on social media?

217 1.000 5.000 3.401 1.427 4.000

8*8. Do you post information

with

eolocation on social media?

217 1.000 5.000 1.751 1.064 1.000

9*9. Do you really feel that the

rivacy policy is protecting your

hts and interests?

217 1.000 5.000 2.843 1.056 2.000

10*10. Have you carefully

read the terms of the platform's

rivacy protection policy when

using a new social media

software?

217 1.000 5.000 1.991 1.159 2.000

A Study on the Universality and Differences of Privacy Paradox Behavior from a Gender Perspective

359

fundamental indicators

name ample size minimum maximum average

standard

deviation

median

11*11.Have you ever chosen

to hide or change your gender

settings on social media platforms

due to privac

concerns?

217 1.000 5.000 1.959 1.055 2.000

12*12. When social media

asks for your personal

information, your choice is？

217 1.000 5.000 3.562 1.318 4.000

Table 2: Results of sample analysis.

t-test the results of the analysis

Gender

(mean±

standard

deviation)

 p

1.0(n=108) 2.0(n=109)

2*2. What is your age

ran

1.83±0.90 1.77±0.91

0.510 0.611

3*3. Approximately how

much time do you spend on

social media each da

3.16±0.97 2.99±0.90 1.314 0.190

4*4. How often do you share

personal information on

social media?

3.19±1.20 3.89±0.89 -4.917

0.000*

5*5. Will you click on links

in social media that include,

but are not limited to,

comment sections,

advertisements?

3.93±1.17 3.77±1.27 0.937 0.350

6*6. Have you ever been

troubled by the risk of

privacy leaks on a social

media platform?

2.09±1.32 2.18±1.42 -0.489 0.626

7*7. What is your attitude

towards interacting with

stran

ers on social media?

3.52±1.40 3.28±1.45 1.209 0.228

8*8. Do you post

information with

eolocation on social media?

1.82±1.12 1.68±1.01 1.005 0.316

9*9.Do you really feel that

the privacy policy is

protecting your rights and

interests?

2.81±1.04 2.88±1.08 -0.524 0.601

10*10.Have you carefully

read the terms of the

latform's privac

protection

2.06±1.16 1.93±1.16

0.819 0.414

APMM 2025 - International Conference on Applied Psychology and Marketing Management

360

policy when using a new

social media software?

11*11.Have you ever chosen

to hide or change your

gender settings on social

media platforms due to

rivac

concerns?

2.09±1.12 1.83±0.97 1.873 0.062

12*12. When social media

asks for your personal

information, your choice

is？

3.66±1.25 3.47±1.38 1.059 0.291

From the table above, we can see that using the t-

test (full name: independent sample t-test) to study

gender, for questions 2*2 to 12*12 in Table 2. It can

be seen that the above 10 items of samples of different

genders do not show significance (p>0.05), which

means that samples of different genders show

consistency in all the above questions and there is no

difference. In addition, gender samples showed

significant results for 4*4. How often do you share

personal information on social media? (p<0.05),

which means that different gender samples have

differences in 4*4. How often do you share personal

information on social media? Specific analysis shows

that gender shows significant results at the 0.01 level

for 4*4. How often do you share personal information

on social media? (t=-4.917, p=0.000), and the specific

comparison shows that the average value of 1.0 (3.19)

is significantly lower than the average value of 2.0

(3.89).In summary, samples of different genders do

not show significant differences for 10 items in Table

2, including 2*2, 3*3, 5*5, 6*6, 7*7, 8*8, 9*9, 10*10,

11*11, and 12*12. In addition, samples of different

genders show significant differences for 1 item, 4*4.

4.1 Research Analysis

Regarding the topic of studying the universality and

differences of privacy paradox behaviors from a

gender perspective, the results show two aspects:

From the fifth question: 5*5. Will you click on

links in social media, including but not limited to

comments and advertisements? 3.93±1.17 |

3.77±1.27, the seventh question: 7*7. What is your

attitude towards interacting with strangers on social

media? 3.52±1.40 | 3.28±1.45, the twelfth question:

12*12. When social media asks for your personal

information, what is your choice? 3.66±1.25 |

3.47±1.38 average index, we can see that both men

and women have a high level of awareness of the

possible exposure of their own privacy information

and the degree of risk perception. The calculated

average values of 3.93, 3.77, 3.52, 3.28, 3.66, and

3.47 are all greater than the median value of 3.

Therefore, it can be determined that the two groups

generally pay more attention to their privacy security.

But according to the sixth question, 6*6. Have you

ever been troubled by the risk of privacy leakage on a

social media platform? 2.09±1.32|2.18±1.42

Question 8, 8*8. Will you post information with

geographic location on social media?

1.82±1.12|1.68±1.01 Question 10, 10*10. When you

use a new social media software, have you carefully

read the platform's privacy protection policy terms?

2.06±1.16 |1.93±1.16 We know that the average

choices of the respondents for the three questions are

2.09, 2.18, 1.82, 1.68, 2.06, and 1.93, which are all

less than the median value of 3. Therefore, it can be

concluded that when it comes to the actual protection

of privacy and other information, whether male or

female, subjective concerns cannot be fully converted

into actual protection behaviors of users in social

media. Therefore, the privacy paradox behavior of the

two groups in social media behavior is still relatively

common.

The second aspect is to study the relationship

between the two gender groups. Although both

groups have common privacy paradox behaviors due

to the lack of security awareness,But in contrast, for

4*4. How often do you share personal information on

social media? 1 item showed significance (p<0.05),

which means that different gender samples have

differences in 4*4. How often do you share personal

information on social media? and showed 0.01 level

significance (t=-4.917, p=0.000). As can be seen from

the specific comparison, the average value of 1.0

(3.19) is significantly lower than the average value of

2.0 (3.89). Therefore, we can get the gender sample

for 4*4. How often do you share personal information

on social media? A total of 1 item showed significant

differences, which shows that women share personal

information more frequently on social media. It can

be concluded that women may disclose more personal

information on social media, which may lead to more

privacy paradox behaviors among women than men.

A Study on the Universality and Differences of Privacy Paradox Behavior from a Gender Perspective

361

5 DISCUSSION

5.1 The Gap Between Privacy

Concerns and Actual Behavior

In the gap analysis between social media users'

privacy protection awareness and actual privacy

protection behaviors, users may overestimate their

ability to control privacy risks or underestimate the

risk of personal information leakage on social media

platforms. This psychological bias may cause users to

pay attention to privacy, but not have good control

when it comes to actual information leakage. At the

same time, users may feel confused or overwhelmed

when faced with complex privacy settings and a large

number of personal information management options,

and thus choose to simplify the process without

conducting in-depth settings or management, which

ultimately leads to insufficient preventive measures.

Social media platforms, educational institutions, non-

profit organizations, etc. should promptly popularize

privacy protection knowledge, strive to simplify the

privacy setting process, make it more intuitive and

easy to use, reduce the difficulty for users to

understand and operate, thereby improving users'

understanding and ability to use privacy settings.

5.2 Consequences and

Countermeasures of Privacy

Paradox Behavior

For individuals, privacy paradox behavior may lead

to the leakage of personal privacy and other

information, which in turn may cause identity theft,

fraud, online harassment, and other problems, causing

damage to personal property security, reputation and

mental health. For society, large-scale privacy leaks

may undermine social trust and affect social stability

and harmony.

Personal information control plays an important

role in privacy protection, and everyone should

always be vigilant (King, 2008). The government

should formulate and improve privacy protection

laws and regulations, clarify the responsibilities and

obligations of social media platforms and users, and

increase penalties for illegal acts. At the same time,

platforms should promptly update technical means,

enhancing the usability of social media privacy

settings, strengthen functions such as data encryption,

access control, and audit tracking, and ensure the

security of user information (Liu & Lei, 2024).

5.3 Future Research Directions

In-depth research on the gender-based study of

privacy paradox behavior can also focus on studying

the differences in privacy protection performance of

different platforms and the impact of these

differences on users' privacy paradox behavior. There

are also differences in the cognition and behavior of

privacy protection among users of different genders

in different cultural backgrounds, and how these

differences affect the prevalence of privacy paradox

behavior.

In addition, we can also analyze the changes in

privacy paradox behavior over different time periods,

as well as the relationship between such changes and

factors such as mobile commerce, the development of

social media, and the improvement of users’ privacy

awareness (Liu et al., 2018).

Research on different aspects of privacy

paradoxical behavior of social media users will help

to gain a deeper understanding of the nature and

influencing factors of privacy paradoxical behavior

and provide a scientific basis for formulating more

effective privacy protection strategies.

6 CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that both men and

women are more concerned about their privacy

security. However, when it comes to the

implementation of privacy and other information

protection behaviors, their subjective concerns cannot

be fully converted into protection measures in social

media, resulting in a gap between social media users'

privacy security awareness and security measures. As

a result, privacy paradox behaviors in social media

behavior of both groups are still relatively common.

Women should pay more attention to protecting their

privacy as they engage in more frequent social media

activities. This study provides many valuable

references for future research in this direction, mainly

affecting the research on the universality and

differences of the subject of privacy paradox behavior

in terms of gender. Future research should focus more

on the differences in the performance of different

platforms in terms of privacy protection, the

differences in cognition and behavior of privacy

protection among users of different genders in

different cultural backgrounds, and the changes in

privacy paradox behavior in different time periods.

In-depth exploration will provide scientific basis for

a deeper understanding of the nature of privacy

APMM 2025 - International Conference on Applied Psychology and Marketing Management

362

paradox behavior and more effective privacy

protection strategies.

AUTHORS CONTRIBUTION

All the authors contributed equally and their names

were listed in alphabetical order.

REFERENCES

B. Liu, S. Yang, Y. Li, An Empirical Study on the Impact

and Interaction of Privacy Preference Settings and

Privacy Feedback on Mobile Business Users'

Behavioral Intentions. China Manag. Sci. 26 (8), 164–

178 (2018)

B. Liu, X. Lei, J. Dong, Research on the Impact of Privacy

Protection Technology Features on Users' Willingness

to Engage in Privacy Protection Behaviors. J. Inf. Sci.

43 (2), 214–229 (2024)

H. Xiao, Does the Privacy Paradox Exist? A Meta-Analysis

of the Relationship Between Privacy Concerns and

Privacy Behaviors. (School of Public Administration,

University of Electronic Science and Technology,

Chengdu, 611731)

N. J. King, Direct Marketing Mobile Phones, and Consumer

Privacy: Ensuring Adequate Disclosure and Consent

Mechanisms for Emerging Mobile Advertising

Practices. Fed. Commun. Law J. 60 (2), 239–247 (2008)

P. A. Norberg, D. R. Horne, D. A. Horne, The Privacy

Paradox: Personal Information Disclosure Intentions

Versus Behaviors. J. Consum. Aff. 41 (1), 100–126

(2007)

Q. Zhang, W. Xie, The Privacy Disclosure Behavior of

Quantifying Self: Connotation Characteristics,

Theoretical Framework, and Research Outlook. J. Inf.

41 (09), 112–120 (2022)

S. B. Barnes, A Privacy Paradox: Social Networking in the

United States. First Monday (2006)

S. Spiekermann, J. Grossklags, B. Berendt, E-Privacy in

2nd Generation E-Commerce: Privacy Preferences

Versus Actual Behavior. In Proceedings of the 3rd

ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, 38–47

(2001)

T. Liu, S. Deng, Review of Research on the Paradox of

Privacy Abroad. J. Inf. Res. Manag. 8 (2), 104–112

(2018)

W. Zhang, C. Kong, L. Chen, Research on the Generation

and Coping Strategies of the Paradox of Social Media

Users' Information Privacy. Inf. Explor. (08), 27–33

(2024)

X. Zhang, C. Li, Research on Social Media Users' Privacy

Protection Based on the "Privacy Paradox." New Media

Res. 9 (07), 50–53 (2023)

A Study on the Universality and Differences of Privacy Paradox Behavior from a Gender Perspective

363