Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 274 views

    Communication Privacy Management CPM Theory

    Uploaded by

    Renzo Velarde
    CPM theory proposes that people view private information as something they own and control. When this private information is shared with others, those others become co-owners of the information responsible for jointly managing disclosure. Effective privacy management requires co-owners to negotiate rules for how the information is handled and to whom it may be further disclosed. Failure to establish clear, mutually agreed-upon rules can result in "boundary turbulence" where a lack of trust develops between the original discloser and the recipient.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Communication Privacy Management CPM Theory

    Uploaded by

    Renzo Velarde
    274 views31 pages
    CPM theory proposes that people view private information as something they own and control. When this private information is shared with others, those others become co-owners of the information responsible for jointly managing disclosure. Effective privacy management requires co-owners to negotiate rules for how the information is handled and to whom it may be further disclosed. Failure to establish clear, mutually agreed-upon rules can result in "boundary turbulence" where a lack of trust develops between the original discloser and the recipient.

    Original Description:

    hello

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    CPM theory proposes that people view private information as something they own and control. When this private information is shared with others, those others become co-owners of the information responsible for jointly managing disclosure. Effective privacy management requires co-owners to negotiate rules for how the information is handled and to whom it may be further disclosed. Failure to establish clear, mutually agreed-upon rules can result in "boundary turbulence" where a lack of trust develops between the original discloser and the recipient.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    274 views31 pages

    Communication Privacy Management CPM Theory

    Uploaded by

    Renzo Velarde
    CPM theory proposes that people view private information as something they own and control. When this private information is shared with others, those others become co-owners of the information responsible for jointly managing disclosure. Effective privacy management requires co-owners to negotiate rules for how the information is handled and to whom it may be further disclosed. Failure to establish clear, mutually agreed-upon rules can result in "boundary turbulence" where a lack of trust develops between the original discloser and the recipient.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 31
    At a glance
    Powered by AI
    The key takeaways are that Communication Privacy Management (CPM) Theory focuses on how people control private information through personal privacy rules and how disclosure of private information to others makes them co-owners of that information subject to negotiated privacy rules.

    The five core principles of CPM theory are: 1) People believe they own private information 2) People control private information through rules 3) Others become co-owners of information disclosed to them 4) Co-owners must negotiate privacy rules 5) Not following rules can cause boundary turbulence

    Factors that help develop privacy rules include culture, gender, motivation, and context.

    Communication Privacy

    Management (CPM) Theory


    Sandra Petronio
    In reference to social penetration theory
    Altman and Taylors theory sink its teeth on self disclosure as primary way to
    develop close relationships.

    openness is only part of the story

    However..

    We also have a desire for privacy.


    Sandra Petronio AGREES *INSERT ting sound*

    Revealing private information strengthens relationships.

    However (again) it could stress your relationships if the person you disclose it
    to cant handle the information and it can reduce your privacy.
    Five core principles of cpm
    1. People believe they own and have a right to control their private information.
    2. People control their private information through the use of personal privacy
    rules.
    3. When others are told or given access to a persons private information, they
    become co-owners of that information.
    4. Co-owners of private information need to negotiate mutually agreeable
    privacy rules about telling others.
    5. When co-owners of private information dont effectively negotiate and follow
    mutually held privacy rules, boundary turbulence is the likely result.
    People believe they own and have
    a right to control their private
    information.
    Disclosure of private information instead of self-disclosure

    Four reasons
    Private information we share to others isnt about ourselves.
    Self-disclosure is associated with personal intimacy.
    Motives for disclosing private information: relieve a burden, prevent a wrong, make an impression,
    gain control or simply enjoy self-expression.
    It has neutral connotation, as opposed to self-disclosure which has positive feel.
    This directs attention to the content of whats said and how the confidant handles this
    not-so-private information.
    People control their private
    information through the use of
    personal privacy rules.
    CPM as rule-based theory
    We can best understand peoples freely chosen actions if we study the system
    of rules they use to interpret and manage their lives.
    Cpm is interpretive
    Counters to an objective or scientific quest to discover universal laws that
    accurately predict where people will draw their privacy boundary.
    Factors that help develop our privacy rules
    Culture differs on the value of openness and disclosure
    Gender
    motivation attraction and liking as interpersonal motives that can loosen
    privacy boundaries that could not otherwise be reached.
    Context traumatic events can temporarily disrupt the influence of culture,
    gender, and motivation.
    Disclosure came along when doing mundane activities which require no eye contact
    because it offers normalcy and control
    Risk/benefit ration we add up the benefits and subtract the costs of each
    opinion in order to do what we think will do the best outcome
    Benefits relief from stress, gaining social support, drawing closer the person
    we tell, and the chance to influence others.
    Risks embarrassments, rejection, diminished power, and everyone finding
    out.
    When others are told or given
    access to a persons private
    information, they become co-
    owners of that information.
    Cpm is a full-fledged communication theory
    Person cant just consider self in decision to conceal or reveal.
    disclosing
    Collectively privacy boundary
    Intersection of personal privacy of co-owners of private information, all of whom are
    responsible for the information.
    Co-ownership
    1. disclosure must realize that the personal privacy boundary encompassing
    information has morphed into a collective privacy boundary
    Once you let the cat out of the bag, its hard to stuff him back

    2. People tend to feel a sense of responsibility for that information.


    doesnt mean, however, they perceive an equal responsibility

    "once the information is known, others 'in the know' may have their own interpretation of how the information
    should be managed."

    3. those who had the information foisted upon them may be much more casual about
    protecting it than those who sought it.
    Co-owners of private information
    need to negotiate mutually
    agreeable privacy rules about
    telling others.
    This principle is pivotal.
    From descriptive to prescriptive.
    assumes that the privacy boundaries co-owners place around this particular
    piece of information won't necessarily look the same.
    focus on boundary ownership, boundary linkage, and boundary permeability.
    Cpm is an insistence that disclosers and their confidants need to negotiate
    mutual rules for possible third-party dissemination.
    Mutually privacy boundaries
    A synchronized collective privacy boundary that co-owners share
    because they have negotiated common privacy rules.
    Boundary ownership Who should decide?
    The rights and responsibilities that co-owners of private information have to
    control its spread.
    Original owner should have the total control
    Recipient = shareholder "fully vested in keeping the information according to
    the original owner's privacy rules
    Deliberate confidant
    A recipient who sought out private information.
    Doctors, professionals.
    Reluctant confidant
    A co-owner of private information who did not seek it nor want it.
    Doesnt want the disclosure, doesnt expect it, and may find the revealed
    information an unwelcome burden.
    Boundary linkage
    An alliance formed by co-owners of private information as to who else should
    be able to know.
    Major consideration: nature of pairs relationship.
    When the revealer and recipient have a close, trusting relationship, theres a
    good chance that the recipient will deal with the new information the way the
    disclosure wants.
    Boundary permeability how much information can
    flow?
    The extent to which a boundary permits private information to flow to third
    parties.
    Two types of barriers.
    Closed, thick, or stretched tight
    information is quarantined because public revelation would be highly
    embarrassing for those in the inner circle.
    Open, thin, or loosely held.
    Information permeates them easily. As barriers to disclosure, they are a
    facade. To the extent that privacy rules are supposed to check the flow of
    insider information.
    When co-owners of private
    information dont effectively
    negotiate and follow mutually held
    privacy rules, boundary turbulence
    is the likely result.
    Boundary turbulence
    Disruptions in Disruption of privacy management and relational trust that
    occurs when collective privacy boundaries aren't synchronized.
    the way the co-owners control and regulate the flow of private information to
    third parties
    turbulence can quickly destroy the trust between revealers and recipients
    that has built up over time
    Factors that can lead to turbulence
    Fuzzy boundaries
    Intentional breaches
    mistakes
    Fuzzy boundaries
    Having no recognized boundaries and only a vague idea of revealers
    expectations, advocates resort to using their own privacy rules to guide what
    they say.
    Intentional breaches
    Sometimes those who are now-in-the-know understand that the original owner
    will be horrified if they blab it about, yet they reveal the secret anyway. They
    may do so to actually hurt the original owner or simply because breaking the
    confidence works to their personal advantage.
    leads to Confidentiality dilemma
    The tragic moral choice confidants face when they must breach a collective privacy
    boundary in order to promote the original owner's welfare.
    Silence helps the oppressor, not the oppressed
    mistakes
    Not all boundary and relational turbulence comes from privacy rules out of
    sync or the intentional breach of boundaries. Sometimes people create turmoil
    by making mistakes, such as letting secrets slip out when their guard is down
    after having a few drinks.
    Errors of judgement
    Miscalculations in timing

    You might also like