Data disclosure of any format does not change students' acceptance of data collection by their university¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Acceptance of data collection procedures did not differ significantly across the control, text, and label conditions. → Stoo Sepp 2025

Evidence¶

Stoo Sepp 2025¶

Stoo Sepp. (2025). Towards More Transparency in Learning Analytics: Sharing Information with University Students Increases their Awareness of Data Collection Practices. Journal of Learning Analytics, 12(3), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2025.8713

q3 · i? · causal · r2

In the same experiment, aggregated acceptance means were 4.12 (control), 4.27 (text), and 4.27 (label) on a 1–5 scale; because ANOVA assumptions failed, the Kruskal-Wallis test was used and "revealed no significant differences between groups". H3 was not supported; equivalence was not tested.

"Given that the assumptions for an ANOVA were not satisfied, a non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis H test revealed no significant differences between groups (χ 2(2) = 2.28, p =.321)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Detailed data disclosure statements, in either text or nutrition-label format, increase university students' confidence that specific data points are collected compared to a generic disclosure — related
• The format of detailed disclosure (detailed text versus icon-based nutrition label) makes no difference to students' confidence about data collection — related
• Detailed disclosure does not make students more conservative about who should have access to their educational data — related
• Students believe private companies neither have nor should have access to their educational data — related