UDK 37.013

Martynova M.D.¹ (Saransk, Russian Federation) – martynovamd@mail.ru

¹National Research Ogarev Mordovia State University

Abstract. The article is devoted to issues related to the competence of teenagers to ensure the confidentiality of their data in various contexts of the digital environment. Based on the analysis of Russian and foreign studies, internal and external factors affecting the observance / non-observance of confidentiality by children in interpersonal, institutional and commercial contexts are identified. Teenagers have blurred the boundaries between the public and private spheres in the digital space, they consider the online environment as a good place for self-expression and social integration.  Among the factors determining the schoolchildren attitude to privacy on the Internet, the level of media literacy, place of residence, personal motivation for using the Internet, situational preferences, peer influence, and family values are highlighted. The preservation of confidentiality among adolescents is due to community agreements, avoiding adult control, informing them by parents and teachers about the list of dangerous situations and technical ways of behavior in them. Depending on the context, teenagers resort to protecting their data guided by one of the principles: «the right to be left alone», «information self-determination in a digital context», «apathy towards confidentiality». However, the rapid development of technologies, their increasing ability to aggregate data from different sources creates a situation of «lagging» educational programs and lagging competencies of parents and teachers in teaching adolescents to respect data confidentiality in different contexts. Educational programs for teenagers about information security should focus on identifying contexts and understanding the hidden motives of people and companies, the ability to analyze the dynamics of dangerous situations and how to manage them, the formation of harm reduction and risk management skills in the network, and the development of critical thinking.

Keywords: teenagers, digital space, big data, interpersonal, institutional and commercial contexts, confidentiality.

References:

1. Russia in numbers: 2020. Available at: https://rosstat.gov.ru/storage/mediabank/GOyirKPV/Rus_2020.pdf (accessed 10 June 2024)
2. Rudenkin D.V. The level of development of digital hygiene skills of modern Russian youth: the results of a sociological study. Sociodynamics, 2022, no. 1, pp. 36-55. (In Russian). DOI: 10.25136/2409-7144.2022.1.37487
3. Pronkina ES. The privacy paradox: why users of social media disclose personal information in public space. RGGU Bulletin. “History. Philology. Cultural Studies. Oriental Studies”, 2018, no. 8, pp. 155-65. (In Russian). URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/ypwxpv
4. Murzina Yu.S., Poznyakov V P. Studies of relationship between digital behavior and personal characteristics of internet users. Institute of Psychology of Russian Academy of Sciences. Social and economic psychology, 2018, vol. 3, no. 3 (11), pp. 6-21. (In Russian). URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/vagofi
5. Glukhov A. P. Generation z’s digital literacy: a social network view // Tomsk State University Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and Political Science. 2019, vol. 52, pp. 126–137. URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/jdbzpg
6. Fitzgerald B. Tracking of teachers and students in Edmodo. 2017. Available at: https://archive.funnymonkey.com/2017/trackingof-teachers-and-students-in-edmodo.html (accessed 10 June 2024)
7. Minding the data. Protecting learners’ privacy and security. Paris. UNESCO. 2022. 55 p. Available at: https://teaching.globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/resources/minding-data-protecting-learners-privacy-and-security (accessed 10 June 2024)
8. Fain P. IBM Looks Beyond the College Degree. Inside Higher Ed. 2019. Available at: https://www.insidehighered.com/digitallearning/article/2019/10/29/interview-ibm-official-about-companys-new-collar-push-look  (accessed 10 June 2024)
9. Rubel A., Jones K.M.L. Student Privacy in Learning Analytics: An Information Ethics Perspective. The Information Society, 2014, vol. 32(2), pp. 143-159. DOI: 10.1080/01972243.2016.1130502
10. Matz S., Kosinski M., Stillwell D. et al. Psychological framing as an effective approach to real-life persuasive communication. PNAS, 2017, vol. 45, pp. 276–282. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1710966114
11. Livingstone S., Haddon L., Görzig A. Children, risk and safety on the internet: research and policy challenges in comparative perspective. Bristol, Policy Press Publ., 2012. 11 p.
12. Finkelhor D., Jones L., Mitchell K. Teaching privacy: A flawed strategy for children’s online safety. Child Abuse & Neglect, 2021, vol. 117, 105064. DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105064
13. Soldatova G.U., Оlkina O.I. Attitude to privacy and protection of personal data: safety of Russian children and adolescents. National Psychological Journal, 2015, vol. 10(3), pp. 56–66. (In Russian). URL: https://www.elibrary.ru/xabvnv
14. Steijn W.M.P., Schouten A.P., Vedder A.H. Why concern regarding privacy differs: The influence of age and (non-)participation on Facebook. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 2016, vol. 10(1), 3. DOI: 10.5817/CP2016-1-3
15. Nissenbaum H. Privacy in Context: Technology, Policy, and the Integrity of Social Life. Stanford, Stanford Law Books Publ., 2009. 281 p.
16. Livingstone S., Stoilova M., Nandagiri R. Children’s data and privacy online: growing up in a digital age: an evidence review. London, UK. London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Media and Communications Publ., 2019.
17. Keen C. Apathy, convenience or irrelevance? Identifying conceptual barriers to safeguarding children’s data privacy. New Media & Society, 2022, vol. 24(1), pp. 50–69. DOI: 10.1177/1461444820960068
18. Boyd D., Marwick A.E. Social privacy in networked publics: Teens’ attitudes, practices, and strategies. Proc. “A Decade in Internet Time: Symposium on the Dynamics of the Internet and Society”. Oxford, UK. 2011. 1-29.
19. Milkaite I., De Wolf R., Lievens E. et al. Children’s reflections on privacy and the protection of their personal data: A child-centric approach to data protection information formats. Children and Youth Services Review, 2021, vol. 129. DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2021.106170
20. Vespoli G., Taddei B., Imbimbo E. et al. The concept of privacy in the digital world according to teenagers. Journal of Public Health. 2024. DOI: 10.1007/s10389-024-02242-x
21. Stoilova M., Livingstone S., Nandagiri R. Digital by Default: Children’s Capacity to Understand and Manage Online. Media and Communication, 2020, vol. 8, issue 4, pp. 197–207. DOI: 10.17645/mac.v8i4.3407
22. Srivastava S., Wilska T.-A., Nyrhinen J. Children as social actors negotiating their privacy in the digital commercial context. Childhood, 2023, vol. 30(3), pp. 235–252. DOI: 10.1177/0907568223118648
23. Desimpelaere L., Hudders L., Van de Sompel D. Children’s and parents’ perceptions of online commercial data practices: A qualitative study. Media and Communication, 2020, vol. 8, issue 4, pp. 163–174. DOI: 10.17645/mac.v8i4.3232
24. Müller V.C. Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2020. Available at:  https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics-ai/ (accessed 10 June 2024)
25. Hargittai E., Marwick A. ‘What can I really do?’ Explaining the privacy paradox with online apathy. International Journal of Communication, 2016, vol. 10, pp.3737–3757.
26. Zuboff S. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. London,Profile Books Publ., 2019. 704 p.
27. Park Y.J. Digital Literacy and Privacy Behavior Online. Communication Research. 2013, vol. 40 (2), pp. 215–236. DOI: 10.1177/0093650211418338

For citation: Martynova M.D. BIG DATA and privacy contexts for teenagers in the digital space. CITISE, 2024, no. 3, pp. 398-408.