Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Private Eyes Are Watching You: Reactions to Location Sensing Technologies

  • Published:
Journal of Business and Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study explored reactions to location sensing technologies (LSTs) which enable organizations to track the location and movements of employees, even off-site. In particular, we examined the relationships among two monitoring characteristics (i.e., purpose and control), perceptions of privacy invasion, and monitoring fairness.

Design/Methodology/Approach

This study employed a 2 (purpose) × 2 (control) factorial design using 208 college students. Study hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression.

Findings

The ability to control the location sensing device was related to monitoring fairness via privacy invasion, but no support was found for monitoring purpose.

Implications

The results underscore the importance of giving employees a sense of control over monitoring and providing them with “protected spaces” where monitoring can be avoided.

Originality/Value

This study offers the first examination of attitudes toward location sensing technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiello, J. (1993). Computer-based work monitoring: Electronic surveillance and its effects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 499–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiello, J. R., & Shao, Y. (1993). Electronic performance monitoring and stress: The role of feedback and goal setting. In M. J. Smith & G. Salvendy (Eds.), Human–computer interaction: Applications and case studies (pp. 1011–1016). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alder, S. (1998). Ethical issues in electronic performance monitoring: A consideration of deontological and teleological perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 729–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alder, G. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2005). Towards understanding fairness judgments associated with computer performance monitoring: An integration of the feedback, justice and monitoring research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 43–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alder, G. S., Noel, T. W., & Ambrose, M. L. (2006). Clarifying the effects of Internet monitoring on job attitudes: The mediating role of employee trust. Information & Management, 43, 894–903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alder, G. S., & Tompkins, P. K. (1997). Electronic performance monitoring: An organizational justice and concertive control perspective. Management Communication Quarterly, 10, 259–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alge, B. (2001). Effects of computer surveillance on perceptions of privacy and procedural justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 797–804.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Alge, B. J., Greenberg, J., & Brinsfield, C. T. (2006). An identity-based model of organizational monitoring: Integrating information privacy and organizational justice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 25, 71–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Alder, G. S. (2000). Designing, implementing and utilizing computerized performance monitoring: Enhancing organizational justice. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 18, 187–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M., Alder, S., & Noel, T. (1998). Electronic performance monitoring: A consideration of rights. In M. Schminke (Ed.), Managerial ethics: Moral management of people & process (pp. 61–79). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, M. L., & Schminke, M. (2009). The role of overall justice judgments in organizational research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 491–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • American Management Association & The ePolicy Institute. (2008). 2007 Workplace monitoring & surveillance. Retrieved June 18, 2009 from http://www.plattgroupllc.com/jun08/2007ElectronicMonitoringSurveillanceSurvey.pdf.

  • Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS users’ guide (Version 4.0). Chicago: Small Waters Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J. (1993). Privacy and procedural justice in organizations. Social Justice Research, 6, 69–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canoni, J. (2004). Employers are using location awareness technology to keep track of their employees. Retrieved on October 4, 2007 from http://www.nixonpeabody.com/publications_detail3.asp?ID=486.

  • Chalykoff, J., & Kochan, T. A. (1989). Computer-aided monitoring: Its influence on employee job satisfaction and turnover. Personnel Psychology, 42, 807–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J., Conlon, D., Wesson, M., Porter, C., & Ng, K. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of the 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 425–445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Courrege, D. (2009). GPS helping district to keep tabs on employees. Retrieved on December 29, 2009 from http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/mar/06/gps_helping_district_keep_tabs_on_employ74049/.

  • DeTienne, K. B., & Abbott, N. T. (1993). Developing an employee centered electronic monitoring system. Journal of Systems Management, 44, 12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch Salamon, S., & Robinson, S. L. (2008). Trust that binds: The impact of collective felt trust on organizational performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 593–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dipboye, R. L. (1990). Laboratory vs. field research in industrial and organizational psychology. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 1–34). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douthitt, E. A., & Aiello, J. R. (2001). The role of participation and control in the effects of computer monitoring on fairness perceptions, task satisfaction, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 867–874.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll and Associates. (2005–2006). U.S. mobile resource management systems market study. Retrieved on October 3, 2007 from http://www.cjdriscoll.com/US_Mobile_Resource_Management_Systems_Market_Study.htm.

  • Eddy, E., Stone, D., & Romero-Stone, E. (1999). The effects of information management policies on reactions to human resource information systems: An integration of privacy and procedural justice perspectives. Personnel Psychology, 52, 335–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enzle, M. E., & Anderson, S. C. (1993). Surveillant intentions and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 257–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilliland, S. W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18, 694–734.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, T. L. (1993). Teaching big brother to be a team player: Computer monitoring and quality. Academy of Management Executive, 7(1), 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, J. (2005). On your tracks: GPS tracking in the workplace. Retrieved on September 22, 2007 from http://www.workrights.org/issue_electronic/NWI_GPS_Report.pdf.

  • Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Philippines: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmon, A. (2003). Lost? Hiding? Your cellphone is keeping tabs. Retrieved on October 2, 2007 from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A02E0DD133FF932A15751C1A9659C8B63.

  • Hovorka-Mead, A. D., Ross, W. H., Whipple, T., & Renchin, M. B. (2002). Watching the detectives: Seasonal student employee reactions to electronic monitoring with and without advance notification. Personnel Psychology, 55, 329–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kightlinger, C. (2004). Schools looking to the skies to track buses. Retrieved on October 2, 2007 from http://www2.indystar.com/articles/8/135547-9318-P.html.

  • Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNall, L. A., & Roch, S. G. (2007). Effects of electronic monitoring types on perceptions of procedural justice, interpersonal justice, and privacy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 658–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNall, L. A., & Roch, S. G. (2009). A social exchange model of employee reactions to electronic performance monitoring. Human Performance, 22, 204–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNall, L. A., & Stanton, J. (2009). Employee location sensing: Implications for security and privacy. In H. R. Rao & S. Upadhyaya (Eds.), Annals of emerging research in information assurance, security and privacy services. Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nebeker, D. M., & Tatum, C. B. (1993). The effects of computer monitoring, standards and rewards on work performance, job satisfaction and stress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 508–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, K., & duRivage, V. (1986, Winter). Computer monitoring: Mismanagement by remote control. Business and Society Review, 16–20.

  • Preacher, K. J., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2001, March). Calculation for the Sobel test: An interactive calculation tool for mediation tests [Computer software]. Available from http://people.ku.edu/~preacher/sobel/sobel.htm.

  • Rogers, K. S., Smith, M. J., & Sainfort, P. C. (1990). Electronic performance monitoring, job design, and psychological stress. In Proceedings of the human factors society 34th annual meeting, (pp. 845–858).

  • Smith, M., Carayon, P., Sanders, K., Lim, S.-Y., & LeGrande, D. (1992). Employee stress and health complaints in jobs with and without electronic performance monitoring. Applied Ergonomics, 23, 17–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sovocool, D. R. (1999). GPS: Charting new terrain: Legal issues related to GPS-based navigation and location systems. Retrieved on October 2, 2007 from http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jul/2/130417.html.

  • Stanton, J. (2000). Reactions to employee performance monitoring: Framework, review and research directions. Human Performance, 13(1), 85–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanton, J. M. (2002). Information technology and privacy: A boundary management perspective. In S. Clarke, E. Coakes, G. Hunter, & A. Wenn (Eds.), Socio-technical and human cognition elements of information systems (pp. 79–103). London: Idea Group.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stanton, J. M., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (1996). Effects of electronic performance monitoring on personal control, task satisfaction, and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 738–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanton, J. M., & Weiss, E. M. (2000). Electronic monitoring in their own words: An exploratory study of employees’ experiences with new types of surveillance. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 423–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, E. F., & Stone, D. L. (1990). Privacy in organizations: Theoretical issues, research findings and protection mechanisms. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 8, 349–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strickland, L. (1957). Surveillance and trust. Journal of Personality, 26, 245–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabak, F., & Smith, W. P. (2005). Privacy and electronic monitoring in the workplace: A model of managerial cognition and relational trust development. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 17, 173–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., & Onorato, R. S. (1999). Social identity, personality, and the self-concept: A self-categorization perspective. In T. R. Tyler, R. M. Kramer, & O. P. John (Eds.), The psychology of the social self (pp. 11–46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1987). The electronic supervisor: New technology, new tensions (OTA-CIT-333). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waxer, C. (2006). Satellite plumbing. Retrieved on September 27, 2007 from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fsb/fsb_archive/2006/02/01/8368208/index.htm.

  • Waxer, C. (n.d.). Navigating privacy concerns to equip workers with GPS. Retrieved on December 30, 2009 from http://www.workforce.com/section/10/feature/24/13/26/.

  • Wells, D. L., Moorman, R. H., & Werner, J. M. (2007). The impact of the perceived purpose of electronic performance monitoring on an array of attitudinal variables. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 18, 121–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westin, A. F. (1992). Two key factors that belong in a macroeconomic analysis of electronic monitoring: Employee perceptions of fairness and the climate of organizational trust or distrust. Applied Ergonomics, 23(1), 35–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zetlin, M. (2009). Keeping tabs on mobile workers. Retrieved on December 29, 2009 from http://technology.inc.com/telecom/articles/200905/tracking.html.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Olajiwon McCadney and Bradie Morgott for their assistance with data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, The College at Brockport, State University of New York, 350 New Campus Dr, Brockport, NY, 14420, USA

    Laurel A. McNall

  2. School of Information Studies, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, USA

    Jeffrey M. Stanton

Authors
  1. Laurel A. McNall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeffrey M. Stanton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laurel A. McNall.

Appendix A

Appendix A

Privacy invasion items (Alge 2001):

  1. 1.

    I feel that some of the monitoring that occurred was an invasion of my privacy.

  2. 2.

    It was acceptable for all of my activities to be monitored in this situation—R.

  3. 3.

    It was necessary for the supervisor to monitor all of my activities—R.

  4. 4.

    Some of my time did not need to be monitored.

  5. 5.

    I feel like the manner in which I was evaluated was an invasion of privacy.

  6. 6.

    I feel that the methods used to monitor my performance were invasive.

  7. 7.

    I am not at all happy about the fact that my activities were monitored.

  8. 8.

    I feel uncomfortable with the way in which some of my time was monitored.

  9. 9.

    The methods used to monitor my activities make me feel uneasy.

  10. 10.

    I feel that some of the information being electronically collected is none of anybody’s business but my own.

  11. 11.

    To some extent, I feel like my privacy has been invaded.

Monitoring Fairness (Alder and Ambrose 2005).

  1. 1.

    The way this company monitors my performance is unfair—R.

  2. 2.

    I think the monitoring procedures used in this company are fair.

R reverse scored item.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McNall, L.A., Stanton, J.M. Private Eyes Are Watching You: Reactions to Location Sensing Technologies. J Bus Psychol 26, 299–309 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9189-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9189-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation