Using Pictograms to Make Privacy Agreements More Accessible
NCT ID: NCT05631210
Last Updated: 2022-11-30
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
57 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-09-06
2019-09-06
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Objective: This study explores the use of pictograms as potential elements to assist in improving the transparency and explanation of privacy agreements.
Methods: During the development of the pictograms, the Double Diamond design process was applied for 3 instances of user interactions and 3 iterations of pictograms. The testing was done by performing a comparative study between a control group, which received a fictional privacy agreement about a health tracking wearable with no pictograms, and an experimental group, which received pictograms. The pictograms were individually tested to assess their efficacy by using an estimated comprehension of information symbols test.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Many users are concerned about personal data collection, and privacy agreements may alleviate these concerns. However, due to the complexity of privacy agreements, there are barriers to understanding data use, which result in users agreeing to terms that they do not fully comprehend. The investigators explore the use of pictograms as a potential way to improve the transparency of privacy agreements and users' understanding of privacy agreements.
An evaluation was conducted to test whether the addition of the pictograms made reading privacy agreements more efficient and less frustrating for users. For this purpose, a questionnaire was developed along with 2 versions of a privacy agreement. The control group (31 participants) received the traditional version of the privacy agreement while the experimental group received the version of the privacy agreement that included the pictograms created by us (29 participants). The privacy agreement was an imaginary privacy agreement about the Fit-bit and the talked about the collection of health data through the wearable. Participants were recruited by using Amazon Mechanical Turk.
The survey was closed and distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk-a website that allows people to fill out surveys for a small monetary gain. The administration of the survey was performed via Amazon Mechanical Turk, and security for the survey and the assurance that there were no duplicate responses were provided by the website. All questions were multiple-choice questions, and if there was a question that was not properly filled, the data for that whole entry were discarded.
The target population was people who had some understanding of technology, and the sample was a convenience sample.
The survey was cleared by the University of Waterloo ethics board (application number: 4060 Privacy Agreement for Sharing Health Data). The survey was voluntary, and participants could stop participating at any moment. At the start of the questionnaire, the participants were told about the purpose of the study, its length, the possible risks, and the benefits of taking the survey. They were then asked for informed consent. The only personalized information collected was employment status, sex, age, ethnicity, and the places where participants lived.
Both groups were quizzed on the content of their version of the privacy agreement and were later asked to rate their perceived level of frustration when looking for the answers. Participants were then asked for suggestions about changes to the privacy agreement and the pictograms.
The 4-part questionnaire was developed by using Qualtrics (Qualtrics International Inc)-a web-based tool-and beta tested via a pilot study to assess its feasibility. The first part asked demographic questions about participants' age, sex, ethnicity, occupation, education, country of residence, and region. The investigators used the second part to compare the performance of the control group to that of the experimental group for part 3. In the second part, the control group was given the traditional version of the privacy agreement, whereas the experimental group was given the version of the privacy agreement with a group of pictograms that summarized its content, which appeared before the written section.
Participants were then asked to answer 5 questions that quizzed them on the content of the privacy agreement that they had received. For both groups, all questions were about the information represented by the pictograms.
The questions were as follows:
* Question 1: "Is your information being collected?"
* Question 2: "Can you opt out of some services?"
* Question 3: "Will your data be identifiable when shared?"
* Question 4: "Is your location being collected?"
* Question 5: "Can third parties have access to your data?" Each participant's response was timed to assess how quickly participants could find the correct answers based on the information presented in their version of the privacy agreement. Time data were compared between the control group and the intervention group.
The third part of the questionnaire asked participants to rate their frustration levels while answering part 2, their level of concern, and their previous knowledge about data privacy. In total, there were 9 pages in the survey, which included the option to return to the previous pages before the end of the survey.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Normal privacy agreement
This group was the control. They were given a normal privacy agreement to read and interpret.
No interventions assigned to this group
Pictogram privacy agreement
This group was given the same privacy agreement of the control group, but with the addition of pictograms that summarized the information.
Privacy agreements with pictograms
The intervention consisted of a modified privacy agreement talking about health data. Instead of presenting all of that information through text, the investigators added pictograms that summarized the key points at the beginning.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Privacy agreements with pictograms
The intervention consisted of a modified privacy agreement talking about health data. Instead of presenting all of that information through text, the investigators added pictograms that summarized the key points at the beginning.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
CSA Group
UNKNOWN
University of Waterloo
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Plinio Morita, PhD
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
University of Waterloo
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Ugaya Mazza L, Fadrique LX, Kuang A, Donovska T, Vaillancourt H, Teague J, Hailey VA, Michell S, Morita PP. Exploring the Use of Pictograms in Privacy Agreements to Facilitate Communication Between Users and Data Collecting Entities: Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Hum Factors. 2023 Jan 25;10:e34855. doi: 10.2196/34855.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
ORE#40606
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id