THE DATAFICATION OF CHILDHOOD: EXAMINING CHILDREN’S AND PARENTS’ DATA PRACTICES, CHILDREN’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND PARENTS’ DILEMMAS

With an ever-growing use and variety of digital devices, most recently the Internet of Things, children’s and family privacy is an important topic with many under-researched aspects (Livingstone, Stoilova, Nandagiri, 2019). Although children and adolescents might be more likely to share greater amounts of personal information than adults, and to apply more lenient privacy settings on social media (Walrave, Vanwesenbeeck, & Heirman, 2012), studies have also shown that young people tend to care about their privacy (see e.g. boyd, 2014; Marwick & boyd, 2014). In this article, we examine “privacy concern” as a possible source of motivation for privacy protecting behaviors. According to the widely used Communication Privacy Management (CPM) theory (Petronio, 2002, 2015), higher privacy concern leads to employing more restrictive privacy behaviors. Nonetheless, previous research has also identified the concept of “privacy paradox” (De Wolf cf. Acquisti & Gross, 2006; Hargittai & Marwick, 2016), which proposes that despite reported privacy concern, young people nonetheless disclose large amounts of information about themselves. A possible explanation is in the feeling of a lack of control in networked environments generating “apathy” and “cynicism” and the impression that “privacy violations are inevitable” (Hargittai & Marwick, 2016, p. 3752). We test the paradox by studying whether children who report greater privacy concern actually disclose more or less personal information about themselves; or otherwise engage in behaviors that might jeopardize their privacy (e.g. by using wearable devices and the Internet of Things, which might expose them to increased levels of data collection for commercial purposes). We further examine whether children whose parents or caregivers share significant amounts of information about them, and children who have experienced sharentingrelated breaches (such as being upset about what their parents have posted online) are more likely to be concerned about their privacy than other children. Following CPM, such breaches, which the theory terms as “turbulence” would lead to higher privacy concern. Finally, we also test whether children whose parents display higher levels of privacy concern tend to be more concerned about their privacy as well. We study these questions on a nationally representative sample of 9-17-year-old Internet using children from Norway and one of their parents/caregivers, conducted as part of the EU Kids Online project in 2018. As a case study, Norway is a country where the use of digital technology among youth is very high, as confirmed by the most recent analyses on nationally representative samples of children in 19 European countries; and so is exposure to risks (Smahel et al., 2020; Helsper et al., 2013). While children’s independent smartphone and social media use starts early, children also tend to enjoy significant family, social and policy-level support for safe digital media use, as compared to other European countries. With this in mind, we ask the following research questions: RQ1: What are the characteristics of children who report grater levels of concern for their privacy online and with digital technology? RQ1a: Are children with higher digital skills more worried about their privacy (because they are more aware of the dangers)? RQ1b: Are children who have experienced privacy or data-protection-related harms more likely to report privacy concerns? RQ2: What are the characteristics of families of children who report grater levels of concern for their privacy online and with digital technology? RQ2a: How are parental attitudes to privacy online and with digital technology related to children’s levels of concern for their privacy? RQ2b: What is the relationship between parental digital skills and children’s levels of concern for their privacy? RQ3: Do children who report higher privacy concern share more information about themselves online than children who report lower concern? RQ3a: Are children who report higher privacy concern less likely than other children to use wearable devices and the Internet of Things devices? Sampling and method This study relies on a nationally representative survey sample of Internet-using children in Norway. The data was collected between June and October 2018 within the EU Kids Online research project. 1001 children of both sexes, aged from 9 to 17 years, were interviewed via CASI method. The data was collected by Ipsos Mori. 47.1% of the sample was female, Mage= 13.3. The sampling frame was stratified by the economic characteristics of municipalities as well as the number of 9 to 17-year-old children who lived there. Respondents were initially recruited by telephone, followed by face-to-face interviews at home. Respondents’ anonymity and confidentiality were secured. The data collection was approved by the Norwegian national Data Authority (Datatilsynet), and followed procedures established by the National Ethical Committees for Social Science and Humanities and by the Norwegian Center for Research Data (NSD). Informed consent was obtained from each parent and each child that participated. Data analyses and initial results In order to verify determinants of higher levels of privacy concern in children and teenagers, we conducted a series of logistic regression analyses in the proportional odds model, controlling for child demographics and psychological characteristics. Findings indicate that privacy breaches such as sharenting, as well as general risk experiences significantly predict higher levels of privacy concern. Furthermore, children who declare having found themselves in a situation where they could use the privacyrelated advice (e.g. on sharing personal information online) are also more concerned about their privacy online. Additionally, parental level of privacy concern seems to have a modelling effect on a child’s attitude towards privacy online. Preliminary analyses into privacy paradox did not provide support for nor evidence against the effect.