ISSN: 1693-6930
TELKOMNIKA Vol. 15, No. 1, March 2017 : 512
– 521 514
by their findings with the objective to investigate users‟ privacy perceptions by integrating privacy values, beliefs, and attitudes into a theoretical framework. Moreover, the result stated
that a higher level of perceived Internet privacy risk is related to a lower level of willingness to provide personal information to transact on the Internet. Previous empirical research in e-
commerce has revealed a positive relationship between risk perception and privacy concerns while they considered personal interest to be an intrinsic motivation based on a belief that
engaging in an activity provides self-fulfilling satisfaction, which is captured by the degree of cognitive attraction in computer interactions. After all, the current theory of calculus can be view
as extension theory from Culnan and Armstrong [11] that argued, in the more specific context of purchasing products and services, individual decision processes prior to the disclosure of
personal information necessary to complete a transaction involve a privacy calculus. They
explain in specific situation, when consumers are informed about the vendor‟s information practices and perceive the business as fair to them, they are more willing to consent to personal
information disclosure. In terms of the privacy calculus the benefits associated with self- disclosing personal information must be contrasted with the cost of privacy. Privacy costs can
be expressed in terms of privacy concerns, i.e. an individual assessment of what happens to the information once disclosed, while trust one of the concept that influence self disclosure [12].
2.3. Privacy Trade-off Relationship
Over decade ago, there is no one would believe that certain individual will be willing to share their confidential information to the stranger, even their sensitive or secret information like
health record or credit card number. Solove [13] says the nothing to hide argument that supports the government policy where surveillance does not undervalue privacy itself and
excuses any government attempt to monitor its citizens activities. There are many arguments, which he uses to counter the first, such as Show me yours and Ill show you mine, or I dont
have anything to hide. But I dont have anything I feel like showing you, either, confirming that government intrusion is only warranted by illegal activities. Meanwhile, the privacy trade-off
issues is not limited on the security sides, Sloan and Warner [14] mentioned that the privacy trade-off important task to balance that relatively short list of benefits against the loss of
informational privacy as potential risk with the ability to control the information about personal details though there is some restriction by the provider. They also emphasized in reality, notice
and choice leaves trade-off issues and subsequent uses of personal information largely to the discretion of private business can deliver and concluded that: Decisions by individual
consumers to withhold data may have large negative externalities for society
’s overall ability to reap the benefits of Big Data and decisions by individual businesses may have large negative
externalities for citizens’ privacy. Unfortunately, while privacy advocates and policy makers acknowledge privacy trade-off issues, they typically pay little attention to them.
2.4. Privacy Protective Behavior
Self-regulatory policy in various countries somehow requires consumers to be responsible and be part of the process of privacy and security process that be represented into
their appropriate behaviour [15]. They support the attempts for the consumers to have understanding of online security and privacy risk on the issue of what is happening to personal
data, what tools are available to protect them, and what kind of skill to response. Therefore, for consumers to be aware of the situation, or acquire such sophisticated skill to adapt with the
changes of technology evolution takes a lot time and effort of education. Indeed, consumers face the consistent and continuous privacy and security threats, when they decide to have
Internet as their backbone to do shopping or other activities. Thus, they suggest that the examination to understand perception with experience affects the decision to engage in specific
behaviour is essential predict the outcome of certain regulated strategy as well to anticipate the implication to the public domain. On the other hand, Walther [8] stated that individual interpret
others feedback in social interactions to establish understanding of others, which essential to develop relationships. Thus, electronic social support entails some changes in the delivery of
these functions. Meanwhile, Kosa [16] mentioned that trust has a positive correlation to privacy while privacy has a negative correlation to trust.
TELKOMNIKA ISSN: 1693-6930
Privacy and Personal Data Protection in Electronic Voting… Muharman Lubis
515
2.5. Personalization Privacy Paradox
