skip to main content
10.1145/2750858.2804281acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Spatial subterfuge: an experience sampling study to predict deceptive location disclosures

Published:07 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Prior research shows that people often engage in deception when sharing location. Privacy concerns, social surveillance and impression management are the primary drivers of these types of behaviors. One methodological question that arises in this research context is the problem of reliable measurement to study predictors of deceptive location disclosure from usage data. In this note, we propose a simple experience sampling method (ESM) approach that is useful for studying this phenomenon. We describe our ESM deployment and report the results of a long term, quantitative study of 204 foursquare users over 1 year. Results indicate that physical distance, tie strength and order of visibility on the foursquare feed are significant predictors (with moderate to high effect sizes) of deceptive location disclosure. We connect these findings to the rich tradition of location disclosure behavior research in ubiquitous computing.

References

  1. Anthony, D., Henderson, T., & Kotz, D. 2007. Privacy in location-aware computing environments. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 6(4). pp. 64--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Birnholtz, J., Guillory, J., Hancock, J., & Bazarova, N. 2010. On my way: Deceptive texting and interpersonal awareness narratives. In Proc. CSCW'10. pp. 1--4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Boesen, J., Rode, J. A., & Mancini, C. 2010. The domestic panopticon: location tracking in families. In Proc. Ubicomp'10. pp. 65--74. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Consolvo, S., & Walker, M.2003. Using the experience sampling method to evaluate ubicomp applications. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 2(2), pp. 24--31. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Consolvo, S., Smith, I. E., Matthews, T., LaMarca, A., Tabert, J., & Powledge, P. 2005. Location disclosure to social relations: why, when, & what people want to share. In Proc. CHI'05. pp. 81--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Cramer, H., Rost, M., & Holmquist, L. E.2011. Performing a check-in: emerging practices, norms and 'conflicts' in location-sharing using foursquare. In Proc. MobileHCI'11. pp. 57--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. foursquare. URL: https://foursquare.com/about/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. foursquare API. URL: https://developer.foursquare.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. foursquare platform feature descriptions. URL: https://support.foursquare.com/hc/en-usGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Guha, S., & Birnholtz, J.2013. Can you see me now?: location, visibility and the management of impressions on foursquare. In Proc. MobileHCI'13. pp. 183--192. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Guha, S., & Wicker, S. B. 2015. Do Birds of a Feather Watch Each Other? Homophily and Social Surveillance in Location Based Social Networks. In Proc. CSCW'15. pp. 1010--1020. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hancock, J., Birnholtz, J., Bazarova, N., Guillory, J., Perlin, J., & Amos, B. 2009. Butler lies: awareness, deception and design. In Proc. CHI'09. pp. 517--526. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Hsieh, G., Li, I., Dey, A., Forlizzi, J., & Hudson, S. E. 2008. Using visualizations to increase compliance in experience sampling. In Proc. Ubicomp. pp. 164--167. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Iachello, G., Smith, I., Consolvo, S., Abowd, G. D., Hughes, J., Howard, J., Potter, F., Scott, J., Sohn, T., Hightower, J., & LaMarca, A. 2005. Control, deception, and communication: Evaluating the deployment of a location-enhanced messaging service. In UbiComp 2005. pp. 213--231. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Khalil, A., & Connelly, K. 2006. Context-aware telephony: privacy preferences and sharing patterns. In Proc. CSCW'06. pp. 469--478. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Page, X., Knijnenburg, B. P., & Kobsa, A. 2013. Fyi: communication style preferences underlie differences in location-sharing adoption and usage. In Proc. Ubicomp'13. pp. 153--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Page, X., Knijnenburg, B. P., & Kobsa, A. 2013. What a tangled web we weave: lying backfires in location-sharing social media. In Proc. CSCW'13. pp. 273--284. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Patil, S., Schlegel, R., Kapadia, A., & Lee, A. J. 2014. Reflection or action?: how feedback and control affect location sharing decisions. In Proc. CHI'14. pp. 101--110. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Pontes, T., Vasconcelos, M., Almeida, J., Kumaraguru, P., & Almeida, V.2012. We know where you live: privacy characterization of foursquare behavior. In Proc. Ubicomp'12. pp. 898--905. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Reynolds, L., Smith, M. E., Birnholtz, J. P., & Hancock, J. T. 2013. Butler lies from both sides: actions and perceptions of unavailability management in texting. In Proc. CSCW'13. pp. 769--778. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Smith, M. E., Hancock, J. T., Reynolds, L., & Birnholtz, J.2014. Everyday deception or a few prolific liars? The prevalence of lies in text messaging. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, pp. 220--227.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Swarm. https://www.swarmapp.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Wicker, S. B. 2013. Cellular Convergence and the Death of Privacy. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Wiese, J., Kelley, P. G., Cranor, L. F., Dabbish, L., Hong, J. I., & Zimmerman, J. 2011. Are you close with me? are you nearby?: investigating social groups, closeness, and willingness to share. In Proc. Ubicomp'11. pp. 197--206. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Wong, G. Y., & Mason, W. M. 1985. The hierarchical logistic regression model for multilevel analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 80(391), pp. 513--524.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Zhang, Z., Zhou, L., Zhao, X., Wang, G., Su, Y., Metzger, M., Zheng, H., & Zhao, Y. B. 2013. On the validity of geosocial mobility traces. Proc. HotNets. Article 11, 7 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Spatial subterfuge: an experience sampling study to predict deceptive location disclosures

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      UbiComp '15: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing
      September 2015
      1302 pages
      ISBN:9781450335744
      DOI:10.1145/2750858

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 7 September 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      UbiComp '15 Paper Acceptance Rate101of394submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate764of2,912submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader