神经隐私：用户信息隐私行为研究的新视角

doi:10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.CN33-6000/C.2021.12.026

摘要
图/表
参考文献(101)
相关文章 (0)

全文: PDF (1534 KB) RICH HTML
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要

随着信息技术的进步和用户隐私意识的提高，用户在新技术背景下的隐私行为已成为一项全球性议题。然而，现有研究结论存在较大分歧，如何从更加基础、本质的层面上有效解释用户的隐私行为是当前研究所面临的困境。基于神经隐私研究框架，利用认知神经科学方法研究用户隐私行为及其背后的认知机制，可为解决现有问题提供新思路。具体来说，未来研究可从以下四个方面深入展开：（1）构建隐私构念与神经活动的关联；（2）从动态神经活动过程视角解构复杂的隐私行为；（3）探索用户隐私行为中自动化、无意识的启发式加工的神经活动证据；（4）整合系统式和启发式两种认知加工过程以完善用户隐私行为研究理论框架。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	王求真
	马达
	杨梦茹
	彭希羡
	朱庆华

关键词 ：信息隐私, 隐私行为, 认知神经科学, 神经隐私

Abstract：

In an age of digital economy with increasing technological sophistication, individuals are more aware than ever of the risks to their privacy. Not surprisingly, users’ privacy behaviors have become a global high-profile issue. Researchers in the field of Information Systems (IS) have conducted valuable explorations around the topic of users’ privacy behaviors. However, the findings are still inconclusive, which limits our understanding of users’ privacy behaviors at a deep level. With various technical advantages, social science research has increasingly adopted cognitive neuroscience methods to reveal new insights to solve dilemmas, including the ones related to information privacy. Therefore, based on the review of privacy behavior research in the high-quality IS journals and the analysis of the advantages of cognitive neuroscience methods, this article proposes a new research framework of neuroprivacy and discusses four potential research directions.First, via rigorous literature retrieval and screening, we obtain 95 articles related to users’ privacy behaviors published in the ten mainstream journals in IS field. With these articles, we analyze the development of privacy behavior research in terms of research themes, methods, and revolution information technologies. Then, we draw the core idea of dual-process theories to integrate the main theoretical lenses and key constructs discussed in these articles, by which we discuss the research status and reveal four gaps in IS privacy behavior research. Next, we depict the features of the three commonly used cognitive neuroscience tool categories: neurophysiology (e.g., eye tracking, skin conductance response, etc.), neuroimaging (e.g., EEG, fMRI, etc.), and neuroregulation (e.g., TMS, tDCS, etc.). Finally, we discuss the advantages of applying cognitive neuroscience methods to privacy research, which provides new insights for addressing the four research gaps in extant IS privacy studies.Via reviewing and analyzing prior literature and neuroscience tools, we propose a new research framework of neuroprivacy that applies the advantages of cognitive neuroscience theories and technologies to explain users’ privacy behaviors and the underlying mechanisms from the neural and physiological views. Specifically, drawing on the perspective of dual-process theories, the neuroprivacy framework includes systematic and heuristic processing as two underlying mechanisms of users’ privacy behaviors. In addition, it also takes the neural circuit activities and functional connections of trust and other complex constructs as entry points to discuss the interaction between cognition and emotion and thus synchronize systematic-heuristic dual processing mechanisms to explain users’ privacy behaviors. Based on the proposed neuroprivacy framework, we further discuss four potential future research directions of neuroprivacy: (1) objectively measure key privacy constructs and build their associations with neural activities; (2) deconstruct complex privacy behaviors from the perspective of dynamic neural activity processes; (3) explore the neural activity evidence of automatic and unconscious heuristic processing in users’ privacy behaviors; (4) integrate the two cognitive mechanisms, systematic and heuristic processing, to improve the theoretical explanation of users’ privacy behaviors.The rapid growth of cognitive neuroscience tools ushers in the forefront of information privacy research—neuroprivacy. We hope that the framework and agenda of neuroprivacy proposed in this paper can provide reference and inspiration for scholars to carry out more insightful research on neuroprivacy.

Key words： information privacy privacy behavior cognitive neuroscience neuroprivacy

收稿日期: 2021-12-02

基金资助:

国家自然科学基金面上项目（72071177）；国家自然科学基金青年项目（72002193）

作者简介: 王求真（https：//orcid.org/0000-0003-1618-8928），女，浙江大学管理学院、神经管理学实验室教授，博士生导师，管理学博士，主要从事神经信息系统、信息系统使用行为研究；；马达（https：//orcid.org/0000-0003-3070-4116），女，浙江大学管理学院、神经管理学实验室博士研究生，主要从事信息隐私、神经信息系统、电子商务与消费者行为研究；；杨梦茹（https：//orcid.org/0000-0001-6851-4786），女，浙江大学管理学院、神经管理学实验室博士研究生，主要从事信息隐私、信息系统使用行为研究；；彭希羡（https：//orcid.org/0000-0001-7327-0325）（通信作者），男，浙江大学管理学院、神经管理学实验室研究员，博士生导师，信息系统与分析学博士，主要从事网站交互和互联网内容设计、用户信息系统行为、神经信息系统研究；；朱庆华（https：//orcid.org/0000-0002-4879-399X），南京大学信息管理学院教授，博士生导师，管理学博士，主要从事用户信息行为、社会化媒体、健康信息学研究；

引用本文:

王求真, 马达, 杨梦茹, 彭希羡, 朱庆华. 神经隐私：用户信息隐私行为研究的新视角[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2022, 52(9): 114-132. Wang Qiuzhen, Ma Da, Yang Mengru, Peng Xixian, Zhu Qinghua. Neuroprivacy: A New Perspective of Information Privacy Research. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2022, 52(9): 114-132.

链接本文:

https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.CN33-6000/C.2021.12.026 或 https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/Y2022/V52/I9/114

1 Acquisti A.， Brandimarte L. & Loewenstein G.， “Privacy and human behavior in the age of information，” Science， Vol. 347， No. 6221 （2015）， pp. 509-514.
2 吴宗大、谢坚、郑城仁等：《数字图书馆用户的行为偏好隐私保护框架》，《中国图书馆学报》2018年第2期，第72-85页。
3 相丽玲、陈梦婕：《试析中外信息安全保障体系的演化路径》，《中国图书馆学报》2018年第2期，第113-131页。
4 Belanger F. & Xu H.， “The role of information systems research in shaping the future of information privacy，” Information Systems Journal， Vol. 25， No. 6 （2015）， pp. 573-578.
5 Acquisti A.， Brandimarte L. & Loewenstein G.， “Secrets and likes： the drive for privacy and the difficulty of achieving it in the digital age，” Journal of Consumer Psychology， Vol. 30， No. 4 （2020）， pp. 736-758.
6 Sheng X.， Felix R. & Saravade S. et al.， “Sight unseen： the role of online security indicators in visual attention to online privacy information，” Journal of Business Research， Vol. 111 （2020）， pp. 218-240.
7 Pfiffelmann J.， Dens N. & Soulez S.， “Personalized advertisements with integration of names and photographs： an eye-tracking experiment，” Journal of Business Research， Vol. 111 （2020）， pp. 196-207.
8 Karegar F.， Pettersson J. S. & Fischer-Hübner S.， “The dilemma of user engagement in privacy notices： effects of interaction modes and habituation on user attention，” Transactions on Privacy and Security， Vol. 23， No. 1 （2020）， pp. 1-38.
9 Farahmand F. & Farahmand F.， “Privacy decision making： the brain approach，” Computer， Vol. 52， No. 4 （2019）， pp. 50-58.
10 Tabassum M.， Alqhatani A. & Aldossari M. et al.， CHI’18： Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems， https：//dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3173574.3173774， 2021-12-02.
11 Lai C. Y.， Liang T. P. & Hui K. L.， “Information privacy paradox： a neural science study，” https：//aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2018/247/， 2021-12-01.
12 Steinfeld N.， “‘I agree to the terms and conditions’：（how） do users read privacy policies online？ an eye-tracking experiment，” Computers in Human Behavior， Vol. 55 （2016）， pp. 992-1000.
13 Vu K. P. L.， Chambers V. & Garcia F. P. et al.， “How users read and comprehend privacy policies，” https：//www.researchgate.net/publication/221098414_How_Users_Read_and_Comprehend_Privacy_Policies， 2021-12-02.
14 Smith H. J.， Milburg S. J. & Burke S. J.， “Information privacy： measuring individuals’ concerns about organizational practices，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 20， No. 2 （1996）， pp. 167-196.
15 Malhotra N. K.， Kim S. S. & Agarwal J.， “Internet users’ information privacy concerns （IUIPC）： the construct， the scale， and a causal model，” Information Systems Research， Vol. 15， No. 4 （2004）， pp. 336-355.
16 Miltgen C. L. & Peyrat-Guillard D.， “Cultural and generational influences on privacy concerns： a qualitative study in seven european countries，” European Journal of Information Systems， Vol. 23， No. 2 （2014）， pp. 103-125.
17 王彦兵、郑菲：《国外SNS用户个人信息披露实证研究的影响因素及其理论评述》，《情报杂志》2016年第35期，第201-207页。
18 张敏、车雨霏、张艳：《用户在线隐私保护行为研究述评》，《图书馆论坛》2019年第39期，第96-107页。
19 谢毅、高充彦、童泽林：《消费者隐私关注研究述评与展望》，《外国经济与管理》2020年第42期，第112-126页。
20 Kahneman D. & Frederick S.， “Representativeness revisited： attribute substitution in intuitive judgment，” in Gilovich T.， Griffin D. & Kahneman D. （eds.）， Heuristics and Biases： The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment， Cambridge： Cambridge University Press， 2002， pp. 1-30.
21 Laufer R. S. & Wolfe M.， “Privacy as a concept and a social issue： a multidimensional developmental theory，” Journal of Social Issues， Vol. 33， No. 3 （1977）， pp. 22-42.
22 Adjerid I.， Peer E. & Acquisti A.， “Beyond the privacy paradox： objective versus relative risk in privacy decision making，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 42， No. 2 （2018）， pp. 465-488.
23 Adjerid I.， Acquisti A. & Loewenstein G.， “Choice architecture， framing， and cascaded privacy choices，” Management Science， Vol. 65， No. 5 （2019）， pp. 2267-2290.
24 Acquisti A.， Adjerid I. & Balebako R. et al.， “Nudges for privacy and security： understanding and assisting users’ choices online，” ACM Computing Surveys， Vol. 50， No. 3 （2017）， pp. 1-41.
25 Dinev T.， McConnell A. R. & Smith H. J.， “Informing privacy research through information systems， psychology， and behavioral economics： thinking outside the ‘APCO’ box，” Information Systems Research， Vol. 26， No. 4 （2015）， pp. 639-655.
26 Xu H.， Dinev T. & Smith J. et al.， “Information privacy concerns： linking individual perceptions with institutional privacy assurances，” Journal of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 12， No. 12 （2011）， pp. 798-824.
27 Petronio S. & Hernandez R.， Communication Privacy Management Theory， Oxford： Oxford University Press， 2019.
28 Yaraghi N.， Gopal R. D. & Ramesh R.， “Doctors’ orders or patients’ preferences？ examining the role of physicians in patients’ privacy decisions on health information exchange platforms，” Journal of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 20， No. 7 （2019）， pp. 928-952.
29 Smith H. J.， Dinev T. & Xu H.， “Information privacy research： an interdisciplinary review，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 35， No. 4 （2011）， pp. 989-1015.
30 Hong W. & Thong J. Y.， “Internet privacy concerns： an integrated conceptualization and four empirical studies，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 37， No. 1 （2013）， pp. 275-298.
31 Baruh L.， Secinti E. & Cemalcilar Z.， “Online privacy concerns and privacy management： a meta-analytical review，” Journal of Communication， Vol. 67， No. 1 （2017）， pp. 26-53.
32 王雪芬、赵宇翔、朱庆华：《社交媒体环境下的用户隐私关注研究现状》，《情报学报》2015年第34期，第1322-1334页。
33 Jiang Z.， Heng C. S. & Choi B. C. F.， “Privacy concerns and privacy-protective behavior in synchronous online social interactions，” Information Systems Research， Vol. 24， No. 3 （2013）， pp. 579-595.
34 Gu J.， Xu Y. & Xu H. et al.， “Privacy concerns for mobile app download： an elaboration likelihood model perspective，” Decision Support Systems， Vol. 94 （2017）， pp. 19-28.
35 Choi B. C. F. & Land L.， “The effects of general privacy concerns and transactional privacy concerns on facebook apps usage，” Information & Management， Vol. 53， No. 7 （2016）， pp. 868-877.
36 Acquisti A. & Grossklags J.， “Privacy and rationality in individual decision making，” IEEE Security & Privacy， Vol. 3， No. 1 （2005）， pp. 26-33.
37 Rose E.， “Data users versus data subjects： are consumers willing to pay for property rights to personal information，” https：//ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1385600， 2021-12-02.
38 Crossler R. E. & Posey C.， “Robbing peter to pay paul： surrendering privacy for security’s sake in an identity ecosystem，” Journal of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 18， No. 7 （2017）， pp. 487-515.
39 Brown B.， “Studying the internet experience，” http：//www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2001/HPL-2001-49.pdf， 2021-12-02.
40 Norberg P. A.， Horne D. R. & Horne D. A.， “The privacy paradox： personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors，” Journal of Consumer Affairs， Vol. 41， No. 1 （2007）， pp. 100-126.
41 Kokolakis S.， “Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour： a review of current research on the privacy paradox phenomenon，” Computers & Security， Vol. 64 （2017）， pp. 122-134.
42 Dinev T. & Hart P.， “An extended privacy calculus model for e-commerce transactions，” Information Systems Research， Vol. 17， No. 1 （2006）， pp. 61-80.
43 Bansal G.， Zahedi F. M. & Gefen D.， “The role of privacy assurance mechanisms in building trust and the moderating role of privacy concern，” European Journal of Information Systems， Vol. 24， No. 6 （2015）， pp. 624-644.
44 Wang Y.， Min Q. & Han S.， “Understanding the effects of trust and risk on individual behavior toward social media platforms： a meta-analysis of the empirical evidence，” Computers in Human Behavior， Vol. 56 （2016）， pp. 34-44.
45 Kehr F.， Kowatsch T. & Wentzel D. et al.， “Blissfully ignorant： the effects of general privacy concerns， general institutional trust， and affect in the privacy calculus，” Information Systems Journal， Vol. 25， No. 6 （2015）， pp. 607-635.
46 van Slyke C.， Shim J. T. & Johnson R. et al.， “Concern for information privacy and online consumer purchasing，” Journal of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 7， No. 6 （2006）， pp. 415-444.
47 Lin S. & Armstrong D. J.， “Beyond information： the role of territory in privacy management behavior on social networking sites，” Journal of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 20， No. 4 （2019）， pp. 434-475.
48 Bansal G.， Zahedi F. M. & Gefen D.， “Do context and personality matter？ trust and privacy concerns in disclosing private information online，” Information & Management， Vol. 53， No. 1 （2016）， pp. 1-21.
49 Hong W. & Thong J. Y. L.， “Internet privacy concerns： an integrated conceptualization and four empirical studies，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 37， No. 1 （2013）， pp. 275-298.
50 Belanger F. & Crossler R. E.， “Dealing with digital traces： understanding protective behaviors on mobile devices，” Journal of Strategic Information Systems， Vol. 28， No. 1 （2019）， pp. 34-49.
51 Miltgen C. L. & Smith H. J.， “Exploring information privacy regulation， risks， trust， and behavior，” Information & Management， Vol. 52， No. 6 （2015）， pp. 741-759.
52 Bansal G.， Zahedi F. M. & Gefen D.， “The impact of personal dispositions on information sensitivity， privacy concern and trust in disclosing health information online，” Decision Support Systems， Vol. 49， No. 2 （2010）， pp. 138-150.
53 Fox G. & Connolly R.， “Mobile health technology adoption across generations： narrowing the digital divide，” Information Systems Journal， Vol. 28， No. 6 （2018）， pp. 995-1019.
54 Dimoka A.， “What does the brain tell us about trust and distrust？ evidence from a functional neuroimaging study，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 34， No. 2 （2010）， pp. 373-396.
55 Goes P. B.， “Information systems research and behavioral economics，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 37， No. 3 （2013）， pp. 3-8.
56 Tams S.， Hill K. & de Guinea A. O. et al.， “NeuroIS—alternative or complement to existing methods？ illustrating the holistic effects of neuroscience and self-reported data in the context of technostress research，” Journal of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 15 （2014）， pp. 723-753.
57 潘煜、万岩、陈国青等：《神经信息系统研究：现状与展望》，《管理科学学报》2018年第21期，第6-26页。
58 Gazzaniga M. S.， The Cognitive Neurosciences， Cambridge： MIT press， 2009.
59 Anderson B. B.， Vance A. & Kirwan C. B. et al.， “How users perceive and respond to security messages： a NeuroIS research agenda and empirical study，” European Journal of Information Systems， Vol. 25， No. 4 （2016）， pp. 364-390.
60 Marc L. W.， “Demystifying neuromarketing，” Journal of Business Research， Vol. 91 （2018）， pp. 205-220.
61 Riedl R.， Banker R. D. & Benbasat I. et al.， “On the foundations of NeuroIS： reflections on the gmunden retreat 2009，” Communications of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 27 （2010）， pp. 243-264.
62 Tu Y.， Zhang Z. & Tan A. et al.， “Alpha and gamma oscillation amplitudes synergistically predict the perception of forthcoming nociceptive stimuli，” Human Brain Mapping， Vol. 37， No. 2 （2016）， pp. 501-514.
63 Vance A.， Jenkins J. L. & Anderson B. B. et al.， “Tuning out security warnings： a longitudinal examination of habituation through fMRI， eye tracking， and field experiments，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 42， No. 2 （2018）， pp. 355-380.
64 Dimoka A.， Pavlou P. A. & Davis F. D.， “NeuroIS： the potential of cognitive neuroscience for information systems research，” Information Systems Research， Vol. 21， No. 2 （2007）， pp. 1-18.
65 Anderson B. B.， Jenkins J. L. & Vance A. et al.， “Your memory is working against you： how eye tracking and memory explain habituation to security warnings，” Decision Support Systems， Vol. 92 （2016）， pp. 3-13.
66 Jenkins J. L.， Anderson B. B. & Vance A. et al.， “More harm than good？ how messages that interrupt can make us vulnerable，” Information Systems Research， Vol. 27， No. 4 （2016）， pp. 880-896.
67 Dimoka A.， Davis F. D. & Gupta A. et al.， “On the use of neurophysiological tools in IS research： developing a research agenda for NeuroIS，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 36， No. 3 （2012）， pp. 679-702.
68 Dimoka A.， Pavlou P. A. & Davis F. D.， “Research commentary—NeuroIS： the potential of cognitive neuroscience for information systems research，” Information Systems Research， Vol. 22， No. 4 （2011）， pp. 687-702.
69 Brass M.， Ullsperger M. & Knoesche T. R. et al.， “Who comes first？ the role of the prefrontal and parietal cortex in cognitive control，” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience， Vol. 17， No. 9 （2005）， pp. 1367-1375.
70 Lau H. C.， Rogers R. D. & Passingham R. E.， “Manipulating the experienced onset of intention after action execution，” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience， Vol. 19， No. 1 （2007）， pp. 81-90.
71 Price C. J. & Friston K. J.， “Functional ontologies for cognition： the systematic definition of structure and function，” Cognitive Neuropsychology， Vol. 22， No. 3 （2005）， pp. 262-275.
72 Casado-Aranda L. A.， Sanchez-Fernandez J. & Montoro-Rios F. J.， “How consumers process online privacy， financial， and performance risks： an fMRI study，” Cyberpsychology， Behavior， and Social Networking， Vol. 21， No. 9 （2018）， pp. 556-562.
73 Mohammed Z. A. & Tejay G. P.， “Examining the privacy paradox through individuals’ neural disposition in e-commerce： an exploratory neuroimaging study，” https：//doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2021.102201， 2021-12-02.
74 do Amaral V.， Ferreira L. A. & Aquino P. T. et al.， “EEG signal classification in usability experiments，” https：//doi.org/10.1109/BRC.2013.6487469， 2021-12-02.
75 Sun R.， Chen J. R. & Wang Y. X. et al.， “An ERP experimental study about the effect of authorization cue characteristics on the privacy behavior of recommended users，” Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Informatics， Vol. 24， No. 4 （2020）， pp. 509-523.
76 Segijn C. M.， Voorveld H. A. M. & Vakeel K. A.， “The role of ad sequence and privacy concerns in personalized advertising： an eye-tracking study into synced advertising effects，” Journal of Advertising， Vol. 50， No. 3 （2021）， pp. 320-329.
77 Windels K.， Heo J. & Jeong Y. et al.， “My friend likes this brand： do ads with social context attract more attention on social networking sites？” Computers in Human Behavior， Vol. 84 （2018）， pp. 420-429.
78 Wilson T. D.， Lindsey S. & Schooler T. Y.， “A model of dual attitudes，” Psychological Review， Vol. 107， No. 1 （2000）， pp. 101-126.
79 Evans J. S. B.， “In two minds： dual-process accounts of reasoning，” Trends in Cognitive Sciences， Vol. 7， No. 10 （2003）， pp. 454-459.
80 Evans J. S. B.， “The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning： extension and evaluation，” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review， Vol. 13， No. 3 （2006）， pp. 378-395.
81 Gwebu K. L.， Wang J. & Guo L.， “Continued usage intention of multifunctional friend networking services： a test of a dual-process model using facebook，” Decision Support Systems， Vol. 67 （2014）， pp. 66-77.
82 Liu Z.， Wang X. & Min Q. et al.， “The effect of role conflict on self-disclosure in social network sites： an integrated perspective of boundary regulation and dual process model，” Information Systems Journal， Vol. 29， No. 2 （2019）， pp. 279-316.
83 Bandara R.， Fernando M. & Akter S.， “Privacy concerns in e-commerce： a taxonomy and a future research agenda，” Electronic Markets， Vol. 30， No. 3 （2019）， pp. 1-19.
84 Liu Z. & Wang X.， “How to regulate individuals’ privacy boundaries on social network sites： a cross-cultural comparison，” Information & Management， Vol. 55， No. 8 （2018）， pp. 1005-1023.
85 Park C.， Jun J. & Lee T.， “Consumer characteristics and the use of social networking sites： a comparison between Korea and the US，” International Marketing Review， Vol. 32， No. 3-4 （2015），pp. 414-437.
86 Warkentin M.， Walden E. & Johnston A. et al.， “Neural correlates of protection motivation for secure IT behaviors： an fMRI examination，” Journal of the Association for Information Systems， Vol. 17， No. 3 （2016）， pp. 194-215.
87 Paulus M. P.， Rogalsky C. & Simmons A. et al.， “Increased activation in the right insula during risk-taking decision making is related to harm avoidance and neuroticism，” Neuroimage， Vol. 19， No. 4 （2003）， pp. 1439-1448.
88 Mohr P. N. C.， Biele G. & Heekeren H. R.， “Neural processing of risk，” The Journal of Neuroscience， Vol. 30， No. 19 （2010）， pp. 6613-6619.
89 Han D.， Dai Y. & Han T. et al.， “Explore awareness of information security： insights from cognitive neuromechanism，” Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience， Vol. 2015 （2015）， pp. 1-8.
90 吴丹、刘春香：《交互式信息检索研究中的眼动追踪分析》，《中国图书馆学报》2019年第45期，第111-130页。
91 Wang Q.， Yang S. & Liu M. et al.， “An eye-tracking study of website complexity from cognitive load perspective，” Decision Support Systems， Vol. 62 （2014）， pp. 1-10.
92 Nunez M. D.， Vandekerckhove J. & Srinivasan R.， “How attention influences perceptual decision making： single-trial EEG correlates of drift-diffusion model parameters，” Journal of Mathematical Psychology， Vol. 76 （2017）， pp. 117-130.
93 Riedl R. & Léger P. M.， Fundamentals of NeuroIS： Information Systems and the Brain， Berlin： Springer， 2016.
94 Phan K. L.， Wager T. & Taylor S. F. et al.， “Functional neuroanatomy of emotion： a meta-analysis of emotion activation studies in PET and fMRI，” Neuroimage， Vol. 16， No. 2 （2002）， pp. 331-348.
95 Etkin A.， Egner T. & Kalisch R.， “Emotional processing in anterior cingulate and medial prefrontal cortex，” Trends in Cognitive Sciences， Vol. 15， No. 2 （2011）， pp. 85-93.
96 Murphy F. C.， Nimmo-Smith I. & Lawrence A. D.， “Functional neuroanatomy of emotions： a meta-analysis，” Cognitive， Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience， Vol. 3， No. 3 （2003）， pp. 207-233.
97 Boss S.， Galletta D. & Lowry P. B. et al.， “What do systems users have to fear？ using fear appeals to engender threats and fear that motivate protective security behaviors，” MIS Quarterly， Vol. 39， No. 4 （2015）， pp. 837-864.
98 Tricomi E.， Balleine B. W. & O’Doherty J. P.， “A specific role for posterior dorsolateral striatum in human habit learning，” European Journal of Neuroscience， Vol. 29， No. 11 （2009）， pp. 2225-2232.
99 Dolan R. J. & Dayan P.， “Goals and habits in the brain，” Neuron， Vol. 80， No. 2 （2013）， pp. 312-325.
100 Anderson B. B.， Vance A. & Kirwan C. B. et al.， “From warning to wallpaper： why the brain habituates to security warnings and what can be done about it，” Journal of Management Information Systems， Vol. 33， No. 3 （2016）， pp. 713-743.
101 罗博、张晋朝：《网络公共信息服务社会信任的影响因素研究》，《中国图书馆学报》2017年第43期，第84-101页。