» Articles » PMID: 29973332

Privacy, Trust, and Data Sharing in Web-Based and Mobile Research: Participant Perspectives in a Large Nationwide Sample of Men Who Have Sex With Men in the United States

Overview
Publisher JMIR Publications
Date 2018 Jul 6
PMID 29973332
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Modern research is heavily reliant on online and mobile technologies, which is particularly true among historically hard-to-reach populations such as gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM). Despite this, very little empirical research has been published on participant perspectives about issues such as privacy, trust, and data sharing.

Objective: The objective of our study was to analyze data from an online sample of 11,032 GBMSM in the United States to examine their trust in and perspectives on privacy and data sharing within online and mobile research.

Methods: Participants were recruited via a social networking site or sexual networking app to complete an anonymous online survey. We conducted a series of repeated measures analyses adjusted for between-person factors to examine within-person differences in the following: (1) trust for guarding personal information across different venues (eg, online research conducted by a university vs. an online search engine); (2) privacy concerns about 12 different types of data for three distinct data activities (ie, collection by app owners, anonymous selling to third parties, and anonymous sharing with researchers); and (3) willingness to share those 12 different types of data with researchers. Due to the large sample size, we primarily reported measures of effect size as evidence of clinical significance.

Results: Online research was rated as most trusted and was more trusted than online and mobile technology companies, such as app owners and search engines, by magnitudes of effect that were moderate-to-large (η=0.06-0.11). Responding about 12 different types of data, participants expressed more concerns about data being anonymously sold to third-party partners (mean 7.6, median 10.0) and fewer concerns about data being collected by the app owners (mean 5.8, median 5.0) or shared anonymously with researchers (mean 4.6, median 3.0); differences were small-to-moderate in size (η=0.01-0.03). Furthermore, participants were most willing to share their public profile information (eg, age) with researchers but least willing to share device usage information (eg, other apps installed); the comparisons were small-to-moderate in size (η=0.03).

Conclusions: Participants reported high levels of trust in online and mobile research, which is noteworthy given recent high-profile cases of corporate and government data security breaches and privacy violations. Researchers and ethical boards should keep up with technological shifts to maintain the ability to guard privacy and confidentiality and maintain trust. There was substantial variability in privacy concerns about and willingness to share different types of data, suggesting the need to gain consent for data sharing on a specific rather than broad basis. Finally, we saw evidence of a privacy paradox, whereby participants expressed privacy concerns about the very types of data-related activities they have likely already permitted through the terms of the apps and sites they use regularly.

Citing Articles

Promises and Pitfalls of Internet Search Data in Mental Health: Critical Review.

Loch A, Kotov R JMIR Ment Health. 2025; 12:e60754.

PMID: 39964955 PMC: 11855165. DOI: 10.2196/60754.


Participant Contributions to Person-Generated Health Data Research Using Mobile Devices: Scoping Review.

Song S, Ashton M, Yoo R, Lkhagvajav Z, Wright R, Mathews D J Med Internet Res. 2025; 27:e51955.

PMID: 39832140 PMC: 11791458. DOI: 10.2196/51955.


Digital interventions targeting excessive substance use and substance use disorders: a comprehensive and systematic scoping review and bibliometric analysis.

Johansson M, Romero D, Jakobson M, Heinemans N, Lindner P Front Psychiatry. 2024; 15:1233888.

PMID: 38374977 PMC: 10875034. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1233888.


Acceptability of Personal Sensing Among People With Alcohol Use Disorder: Observational Study.

Wyant K, Moshontz H, Ward S, Fronk G, Curtin J JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023; 11:e41833.

PMID: 37639300 PMC: 10495858. DOI: 10.2196/41833.


Analysis of Smartphone Text Data Related to mpox from a U.S. Sample of Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men During the 2022 Outbreak.

Cascalheira C, Hong C, Beltran R, Karkkainen K, Beikzadeh M, Sarrafzadeh M LGBT Health. 2023; 10(7):560-565.

PMID: 37219872 PMC: 10552145. DOI: 10.1089/lgbt.2022.0307.


References
1.
Vodicka E, Mejilla R, Leveille S, Ralston J, Darer J, Delbanco T . Online access to doctors' notes: patient concerns about privacy. J Med Internet Res. 2013; 15(9):e208. PMC: 3785972. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.2670. View

2.
Rosenberger J, Reece M, Novak D, Mayer K . The Internet as a valuable tool for promoting a new framework for sexual health among gay men and other men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav. 2011; 15 Suppl 1:S88-90. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-011-9897-y. View

3.
Holloway I, Pulsipher C, Gibbs J, Barman-Adhikari A, Rice E . Network Influences on the Sexual Risk Behaviors of Gay, Bisexual and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men Using Geosocial Networking Applications. AIDS Behav. 2015; 19 Suppl 2:112-22. PMC: 5060094. DOI: 10.1007/s10461-014-0989-3. View

4.
Bender J, Cyr A, Arbuckle L, Ferris L . Ethics and Privacy Implications of Using the Internet and Social Media to Recruit Participants for Health Research: A Privacy-by-Design Framework for Online Recruitment. J Med Internet Res. 2017; 19(4):e104. PMC: 5399223. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.7029. View

5.
Buchanan E, Hvizdak E . Online survey tools: ethical and methodological concerns of human research ethics committees. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2009; 4(2):37-48. DOI: 10.1525/jer.2009.4.2.37. View