[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ fullwidth=”off” specialty=”on” next_background_color=”#000000″][et_pb_column type=”2_3″ specialty_columns=”2″][et_pb_row_inner locked=”off”][et_pb_column_inner type=”4_4″ saved_specialty_column_type=”2_3″][et_pb_post_title _builder_version=”3.0.106″ title=”on” meta=”on” author=”on” date=”on” categories=”on” comments=”on” featured_image=”on” featured_placement=”above” text_color=”dark” text_background=”off” locked=”on” parent_locked=”off” \/][et_pb_text _builder_version=”3.17.6″ background_layout=”light” parent_locked=”off”]<\/p>\n
On the 20th of May, DiCED’s Rachel Gibson presented at the PSA specialist group for Political Psychology about micro-targeting.<\/span><\/p>\n Specifically, the talk was called “Personalisation versus privacy concerns as determinants of attitudes toward political micro-targeting in the US, Germany and France”.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Abstract:<\/strong><\/p>\n The practice of political micro-targeting (PMT) \u2013 tailoring messages for voters based on their personal data \u2013 has increased significantly over the past two decades, particularly in the U.S. While studies consistently show that publics are very concerned about the use of PMT in elections, the reasons for that opposition have not been subject to detailed theoretical or empirical analysis. Most studies cite privacy preference as a core motivation behind voter concerns but analyses typically focus on their linkage to standard socio-demographic correlates and partisanship. This paper seeks to advance this research by developing and testing a new explanatory model of attitudes toward PMT that examines the extent to which privacy concerns are driving peoples\u2019 fears about PMT across three established democracies, vis a vis other psychological, socioeconomic and demographic factors. In particular, we examine the idea that privacy concerns, while important in determining attitudes toward PMT may be offset or moderated by the perceived benefits of personalised ad content. This so-called\u00a0 \u2018privacy calculus\u2019 has been demonstrated for commercial advertising, however, whether it applies to political campaigns has not yet been explored. We hypothesise it will have more limited impact in the political context, but where it is detected, it will be most influential in the US. We further argue that its impact will vary according to the type of data used for PMT. We test our expectations using survey data from a representative YouGov samples of U.S. German and French voters during the 2020 U.S. Presidential, 2021 German Federal and 2022 French Presidential election campaigns. Our findings show that controlling for socio-demographic and other psychological traits, the privacy calculus plays a strong and significant role in moderating concerns about PMT regardless of national context, but that its effect does vary slightly according to the type of personal data used. Our findings are important in that they suggest we need to adopt a more nuanced understanding of current worries about PMT, and particularly that there it may hold value for some voters. It also calls into question whether moves to ban the practice entirely are necessary or appropriate.<\/em><\/p>\n A recording of this talk can be viewed below or, externally, on YouTube.<\/span><\/p>\n