Pathos or logos? How governance legitimacy perception influences individual privacy trade-offs during COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the tension between individual privacy and effective public health governance. Governments utilized digital methods for contact tracing and surveillance, necessitating the collection of sensitive personal data. The willingness of individuals to share this information is contingent upon their perception of the government's legitimacy. Existing research explains this willingness through functional (practical benefits) and values (trust and moral obligation) dimensions. However, the values approach overlooks the role of individuals' direct evaluation of governance legitimacy. This study addresses this gap by exploring how perceptions of governance legitimacy, particularly its cognitive and moral aspects, influence individuals' decisions to disclose health information during a public health crisis. Understanding this dynamic is crucial for designing effective and ethically sound public health interventions during future pandemics.

The concept of legitimacy, encompassing the public's acceptance of authority's actions, is central to crisis management. During the COVID-19 pandemic, perceived legitimacy of health authorities was vital for public compliance with guidelines. This study focuses on two dimensions of legitimacy: cognitive legitimacy (passive acceptance of authority's actions as necessary and comprehensible) and moral legitimacy (active evaluation of authority's adherence to social norms and values). The study also considers altruism—prosocial behavior intended to benefit others—as a mediator between governance legitimacy and privacy disclosure. Finally, education level is posited as a moderator, potentially influencing the relationship between legitimacy and altruistic behavior due to its impact on critical thinking, moral values, and understanding of risk/benefit trade-offs related to privacy disclosure.

A survey was conducted in Shanghai, China, during the 2022 lockdown (July 15th – August 14th, 2022). The survey employed established measurement scales for privacy disclosure, cognitive legitimacy, moral legitimacy, and altruism, using 5-point Likert scales. A quota sampling method was used to ensure representativeness, resulting in 1008 valid responses. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to test the hypotheses, incorporating control variables for gender, age, annual household income, and media consumption. Education level was treated as a moderating variable, categorized into low (primary, middle, high school) and high (junior college, undergraduate, postgraduate) education levels. Cronbach's alpha coefficients were calculated to assess the reliability of the scales. The SEM model included three stages: (1) the direct effect of cognitive and moral legitimacy on privacy disclosure; (2) the mediating effect of altruism; and (3) the moderating effect of education level.

The SEM analysis revealed the following: 1. **Main Effects:** Both cognitive (β = 0.33, p < 0.001) and moral legitimacy (β = 0.48, p < 0.001) significantly and positively influenced privacy disclosure. Moral legitimacy showed a stronger effect. 2. **Mediating Effects:** Both cognitive (indirect effect β = 0.03, p < 0.001) and moral legitimacy (indirect effect β = 0.03, p < 0.001) positively influenced privacy disclosure through the mediating role of altruism. Altruism itself also significantly predicted privacy disclosure (β = 0.08, p < 0.01). 3. **Moderating Effects:** Education level significantly moderated the relationship between legitimacy and altruism. High education level negatively moderated the relationship between cognitive legitimacy and altruism (β = 0.44, p < 0.01), while positively moderating the relationship between moral legitimacy and altruism (β = -0.43, p < 0.01). This suggests that for individuals with higher education, cognitive legitimacy is more important in driving altruistic behavior, while for those with lower education, moral legitimacy is more influential. The full model showed a good fit (χ² = 0.135, df = 2, p > 0.05, CFI = 1.000, TLI = 1.014, RMSEA = 0.00, SRMR = 0.00).

The findings highlight the importance of governance legitimacy, particularly moral legitimacy, in fostering altruistic behavior and willingness to share personal information during a health crisis. The stronger effect of moral legitimacy, especially in a collectivist society like China, underscores the role of social norms and values in shaping individual decisions. The mediating role of altruism suggests that strategies focusing on fostering a sense of collective responsibility can be effective in encouraging privacy disclosure. The moderating effect of education suggests the need for tailored communication strategies, emphasizing cognitive aspects for higher-educated individuals and moral aspects for those with lower education. These findings have implications for public health communication and policy design, emphasizing the importance of building trust and promoting a sense of collective responsibility to encourage participation in public health initiatives.

This study demonstrates the critical role of governance legitimacy, particularly moral legitimacy, in influencing privacy trade-offs during crises. Altruism acts as a key mediator, and education level significantly moderates the relationship between legitimacy and altruistic behavior. Future research should explore cross-cultural comparisons and integrate macro-level modernization indicators to further refine our understanding. The concept of "governance-oriented privacy" is introduced, acknowledging the shift towards larger-scale data management in public health.

The study's generalizability might be limited by its focus on a specific context (Shanghai lockdown). Self-reported data may be subject to biases. The cross-sectional design prevents establishing causal relationships. Future research should replicate the study in diverse settings, incorporate objective measures, and adopt a longitudinal design.