Classical sociology has seen various discussions on the tension between individuality and social solidarity. Some thought that increasing individuality may ruin the foundation of traditional society and may lead to social disintegration, while others believed that modern society is built on mutual dependence and legal-rational authority. An increase in individuality may not lead to social disintegration. The debate on personal privacy is an extension of this sociological concern. / The individual concern for privacy was said to be derived from selfishness and individualism, and led to social isolation. According to this view, people who have high concerns for their information privacy are only concerned with their own interests and would not like to sacrifice their own interests for the common good. They are also social isolates who would not like to take part in social activities. This social concern for privacy is derived from individualism in culture. However, these views are purely speculations with no empirical evidence for support. The purpose of this study is to provide an empirical test of three core questions: First, does individual concern for privacy indicate social isolation? Second, does individual concern for privacy indicate selfishness at the expense of common good? Third, does individual concern for privacy derive from cultural individualism? / To address the first question, this study used the 1990 Harris Poll and found a positive association between privacy concern and social participation. For the second question, this study used the General Social Survey and found that privacy concerns were associated with willingness to pay more tax to improve social welfare programs. As to the third question, this study used the International Social Survey Program to demonstrate that there was no association between individualism and privacy concerns. From all these findings, individual concerns regarding information privacy do not mean selfishness, do not lead to social isolation and are not derived from individualism. The results of the study call for a positive evaluation of individual privacy concerns and a thorough protection of individual autonomy. The findings of the study clarified the long-term misunderstanding of individual privacy and may be useful for policy and legal research on privacy protection. / 經典社會學的討論注意到現代社會中個人自主性的增加與社會團結之間的矛盾。由於傳統社會的團結力量逐漸減弱，有看法認為個人主義的傾向有可能會導致社會解體。同時也有看法認為，現代社會的團結是基於人與人之間功能上的相互依賴或者基於法理權威，個人主義的傾向並非一定帶來社會解體。有關於個人私隱的討論正是這個社會學所關心問題的延伸。 / 個人對私隱的關注曾經普遍被認為是來自於自私自利的個人主義傾向，關注個人私隱的人是脫離社會的孤僻者。這種看法認為個人對私隱的關注是對社會不負責任的表現，這種傾向源自於文化中的個人主義。但是這種看法忽視了當代社會公共權力愈來愈多侵入私人領域的作法。人們對私隱的關注是對私人領域遭到威脅的反應。關注個人私隱的人相反可能更加關注公民的社會權利和個人空間，也有可能更加積極參與社會事務，而不是一個自私自利的孤僻者。私隱的關注度更有可能受到制度因素，經濟因素的影響，未必一定源自於個人主義。另外，將個人對私隱的關注認為是自私自利和個人主義傾向的看法也是沒有任何實證資料證實的猜想。本研究的目的在於通過實證研究揭示三個關於私隱的核心問題。第一，關注私隱是否意味著脫離社會？第二，關注私隱是否是一種自私的傾向？第三，關注私隱是否源於個人人主義的文化？ / 為了回答第一個問題，本研究透過分析美國1990年哈里斯民意調查（Harris Poll 1990）發現個人私隱關注度與社會參與度有正向的相關關係。第二個問題則是透過分析美國社會綜合調查（GSS），本研究發現，私隱關注度與個人為提升社會福利而繳納更多稅項的意願有關。第三個問題的回答是透過分析國際社會調查項目（ISSP），本研究發現國家的個人主義文化價值觀與個人對私隱關注度之間沒有關聯。綜合以上發現，本研究認為對個人私隱關注度需要一個正面的看法，關注個人私隱的人是社會的積極參與者，也是公共利益的維護者，她們並不是自私自利的孤僻者。要降低個人對私隱的關注需要從政治制度和經濟發展角度入手而不是一味地批評個人主義傾向。本研究澄清了一個有關個人私隱的長期爭論，對相關的立法和政策研究有一定的參考價值。 / Classical sociology has seen various discussions on the tension between individuality and social solidarity. Some thought that increasing individuality may ruin the foundation of traditional society and may lead to social disintegration, while others believed that modern society is built on mutual dependence and legal-rational authority. An increase in individuality may not lead to social disintegration. The debate on personal privacy is an extension of this sociological concern. / The individual concern for privacy was said to be derived from selfishness and individualism, and led to social isolation. According to this view, people who have high concerns for their information privacy are only concerned with their own interests and would not like to sacrifice their own interests for the common good. They are also social isolates who would not like to take part in social activities. This social concern for privacy is derived from individualism in culture. However, these views are purely speculations with no empirical evidence for support. The purpose of this study is to provide an empirical test of three core questions: First, does individual concern for privacy indicate social isolation? Second, does individual concern for privacy indicate selfishness at the expense of common good? Third, does individual concern for privacy derive from cultural individualism? / To address the first question, this study used the 1990 Harris Poll and found a positive association between privacy concern and social participation. For the second question, this study used the General Social Survey and found that privacy concerns were associated with willingness to pay more tax to improve social welfare programs. As to the third question, this study used the International Social Survey Program to demonstrate that there was no association between individualism and privacy concerns. From all these findings, individual concerns regarding information privacy do not mean selfishness, do not lead to social isolation and are not derived from individualism. The results of the study call for a positive evaluation of individual privacy concerns and a thorough protection of individual autonomy. The findings of the study clarified the long-term misunderstanding of individual privacy and may be useful for policy and legal research on privacy protection. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Detailed summary in vernacular field only. / Guo, Hua. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2012. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 133-139). / Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Abstract also in Chinese. / Chapter Chapter 1. --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1. --- Modernity and Privacy --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2. --- The Rise of Privacy Concern --- p.5 / Chapter 1.3. --- Concepts of Privacy --- p.8 / Chapter 1.4. --- Two Competing Views --- p.10 / Chapter 1.5. --- Purpose of This Study --- p.14 / Chapter Chapter 2. --- Data and Method --- p.20 / Chapter 2.1. --- Datasets --- p.20 / Chapter 2.2. --- Measurement --- p.22 / Chapter 2.3. --- Method --- p.26 / Chapter Chapter 3. --- Concern for Privacy and Social participation --- p.27 / Chapter 3.1. --- Introduction --- p.27 / Chapter 3.2. --- Literature review --- p.29 / Chapter 3.3. --- Model Specification --- p.36 / Chapter 3.4. --- Data and Method --- p.38 / Chapter 3.5. --- Results --- p.44 / Chapter 3.6. --- Conclusion --- p.50 / Chapter Chapter 4. --- Concern for Privacy and Common Good --- p.53 / Chapter 4.1. --- Introduction --- p.53 / Chapter 4.2. --- Literature Review --- p.55 / Chapter 4.3. --- Hypotheses and Model Specification --- p.68 / Chapter 4.4. --- Data and Method --- p.72 / Chapter 4.5. --- Results --- p.77 / Chapter 4.6. --- Conclusion --- p.82 / Chapter Chapter 5. --- Concern for Privacy and Culture Values --- p.85 / Chapter 5.1. --- Introduction --- p.85 / Chapter 5.2. --- Literature review --- p.89 / Chapter 5.3. --- Conceptual framework and Hypotheses --- p.98 / Chapter 5.4. --- Dataset and method --- p.101 / Chapter 5.5. --- Results --- p.110 / Chapter 5.6. --- Conclusion --- p.115 / Chapter 5.7. --- Limitations --- p.118 / Chapter Chapter 6. --- Conclusion --- p.121 / Annex --- p.128 / References --- p.133
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:cuhk.edu.hk/oai:cuhk-dr:cuhk_328182 |
| Date | January 2012 |
| Contributors | Guo, Hua, Chinese University of Hong Kong Graduate School. Division of Sociology. |
| Source Sets | The Chinese University of Hong Kong |
| Language | English, Chinese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Text, bibliography |
| Format | electronic resource, electronic resource, remote, 1 online resource (ix, 139 leaves) : ill. |
| Rights | Use of this resource is governed by the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons “Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International” License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) |
Page generated in 0.0117 seconds