Skip to main content

A Step in the Right Direction – Understanding Privacy Concerns and Perceived Sensitivity of Fitness Trackers

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 608))

Abstract

Keeping an active lifestyle has been important and recommended for decades. The arrival of the Internet of Things (IoT) offers opportunities to simplify the tracking and logging of data supporting that lifestyle. So-called activity or fitness trackers have become smaller and more affordable over the past few years. However, their use is not as widespread as could be. This explorative study with n = 82 participants investigates privacy concerns and sensitivity regarding data gathered with wearables. It was found that long-term storage location and possible recipients of the collected data do play important roles. However, the consensus was that the participants would prefer to keep said data to themselves. Furthermore, user factors such as age, gender, and privacy behavior could not be identified as having an effect on sharing said data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. World Health Organization: Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health. WHO Press, Geneva (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Salmon, P.: Effects of physical exercise on anxiety, depression and sensitivity to stress - a unifying theory. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 21, 33–61 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alley, S., Schoeppe, S., Guertler, D., Jennings, C., Duncan, M.J., Vandelanotte, C.: Interest and preferences for using advanced physical activity tracking devices: results of a national cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open 6, e011243 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Guo, F., Brown, M.S.: An evaluation of wearable activity monitoring devices. In: PDM 2013, pp. 31–34 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Rasche, P., Wille, M., Theis, S., Schlick, C.M., Mertens, A.: Activity tracker and elderly. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence and Computing (CIT/IUCC/DASC/PICOM), pp. 1411–1416 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Case, M.A., Burwick, H.A., Volpp, K.G., Patel, M.S.: Accuracy of smartphone applications and wearable devices for tracking physical activity data. JAMA 313, 625–626 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaewkannate, K., Kim, S.: A comparison of wearable fitness devices. BMC Publ. Health 16, 433 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sasaki, J.E., Hickey, A., Mavilia, M., Tedesco, J., John, D., Keadle, S.K., Freedson, P.S.: Validation of the Fitbit wireless activity tracker for prediction of energy expenditure. J. Phys. Act. Health 12, 149–154 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Meyer, J., Fortmann, J., Wasmann, M., Heuten, W.: Making lifelogging usable: design guidelines for activity trackers. In: He, X., Al, E. (eds.) MultiMedia Modeling, pp. 323–334. Springer, Cham (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Preusse, K.C., Mitzner, T.L., Fausset, C.B., Rogers, W.A.: Older adults’ acceptance of activity trackers. J. Appl. Gerontol. 36, 127–155 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Clawson, J., Pater, J.A., Miller, A.D., Mynatt, E.D., Mamykina, L.: No longer wearing: investigating the abandonment of personal health-tracking technologies on craigslist. In: UbiComp 2015, pp. 647–658 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Fogg, B.J.: Computers as persuasive social actors. In: Fogg, B.J. (ed.) Persuasive Technology. Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do, pp. 89–120. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Vervier, L., Zeißig, E.-M., Lidynia, C., Ziefle, M.: Perceptions of digital footprints and the value of privacy. In: International Conference on Internet of Things and Big Data and Security (2017, in press)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zeißig, E.-M., Lidynia, C., Vervier, L., Gadeib, A., Ziefle, M.: Online privacy perceptions of older adults. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. (2017, in press)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Solove, D.J.: A taxonomy of privacy. Univ. PA. Law Rev. 154, 477–560 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Altman, I.: Privacy. A conceptual analysis. Environ. Behav. 8, 7–29 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Finn, R.L., Wright, D., Friedewald, M.: Seven types of privacy. In: Gutwirth, S., Leenes, R., de Hert, P., Poullet, Y. (eds.) European Data Protection: Coming of Age, pp. 3–32. Springer Science+Business Media B.V, Dordrecht (2013)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Wright, D., Raab, C.: Privacy principles, risks and harms. Int. Rev. Law, Comput. Technol. 28, 277–298 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith, H.J., Dinev, T., Xu, H.: Information privacy research: an interdisciplinary review. MIS Q. 35, 989–1015 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kokolakis, S.: Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: a review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon. Comput. Secur. 2011, 1–29 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Norberg, P.A., Horne, D.R., Horne, D.A.: The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. J. Consum. Aff. 41, 100–126 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Brandimarte, L., Acquisti, A., Loewenstein, G.: Misplaced confidences: privacy and the control paradox. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 4, 340–347 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Guo, X., Zhang, X., Sun, Y.: The privacy-personalization paradox in mHealth services acceptance of different age groups. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 16, 55–65 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Dinev, T., Hart, P.: An extended privacy calculus model for E-commerce transactions. Inf. Syst. Res. 17, 61–80 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fernández-Alemán, J.L., Señor, I.C., Lozoya, P.Á.O., Toval, A.: Security and privacy in electronic health records: a systematic literature review. J. Biomed. Inform. 46, 541–562 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Abbas, A., Khan, S.U.: A review on the state-of-the-art privacy-preserving approaches in the e-Health clouds. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform. 18, 1431–1441 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Li, H., Wu, J., Gao, Y., Shi, Y.: Examining individuals’ adoption of healthcare wearable devices: an empirical study from privacy calculus perspective. Int. J. Med. Inform. 88, 8–17 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Motti, V.G., Caine, K.: Users’ privacy concerns about wearables. In: Brenner, M., et al. (eds.) FC 2015 Workshops, pp. 231–244. International Financial Cryptography Association (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Bellekens, X., Nieradzinska, K., Bellekens, A., Seeam, P., Hamilton, A., Seeam, A.: A study on situational awareness security and privacy of wearable health monitoring devices. Int. J. Cyber Situat. Aware. 1, 1–25 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Beier, G.: Kontrollüberzeugungen im Umgang mit Technik [Locus of control when interacting with technology]. Rep. Psychol. 24, 684–693 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Arning, K., Ziefle, M.: Understanding age differences in PDA acceptance and performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 23, 2904–2927 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Brauner, P., Holzinger, A., Ziefle, M.: Ubiquitous computing at its best: serious exercise games for older adults in ambient assisted living environments – a technology acceptance perspective. EAI Endorsed Trans. Serious Games 15, 1–12 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Palacios, J., Potoglou, D., Feijoo, C.: Does privacy concern influence E-shoppers’ choices for online retailers? An application of the integrated latent variable choice model. In: International Choice Modelling Conference 2015, 10–13 May, Austin, Texas, USA (2015)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all participants of the focus group and the survey for their willingness to share their thoughts and feelings about persuasive technologies, fitness trackers, and their privacy concerns. We also thank Thomas Achterfeldt for his research support. Parts of this work have been funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) under project MyneData (KIS1DSD045).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chantal Lidynia .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lidynia, C., Brauner, P., Ziefle, M. (2018). A Step in the Right Direction – Understanding Privacy Concerns and Perceived Sensitivity of Fitness Trackers. In: Ahram, T., Falcão, C. (eds) Advances in Human Factors in Wearable Technologies and Game Design. AHFE 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 608. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60639-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60639-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60638-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60639-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics