Paper Number
ICIS2025-1544
Paper Type
Short
Abstract
This study tests whether regulatory actions targeting one platform influence perceptions of others. Drawing on regulatory spillover and cognitive dissonance theory, we examine the U.S. TikTok ban and its spillover to ChatGPT’s privacy discourse. Using the BERTopic, we identify six topics of ChatGPT discourse and, with a zero-shot classifier, categorize rationalizations as justification, denial, or trivialization. Results show that justification dominates across most topics, denial emerges primarily in adversarial contexts (e.g., lawsuits), and trivialization is most common when privacy risks are salient. A Chi-square analysis confirms a significant post-ban shift, with justification increasing and denial decreasing. These findings extend spillover theory by conceptualizing it as a discursive spillover and enrich cognitive dissonance theory by demonstrating how regulatory actions reshape the public mix of rationalizations. These findings offer guidance for communication and policy.
Recommended Citation
Gao, Xuan; Baird, Aaron; and Xia, Yusen, "Regulatory Spillover and Privacy Rationalizations: Evidence from ChatGPT Discourse After the TikTok Ban" (2025). ICIS 2025 Proceedings. 9.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2025/cyb_security/cyb_security/9
Regulatory Spillover and Privacy Rationalizations: Evidence from ChatGPT Discourse After the TikTok Ban
This study tests whether regulatory actions targeting one platform influence perceptions of others. Drawing on regulatory spillover and cognitive dissonance theory, we examine the U.S. TikTok ban and its spillover to ChatGPT’s privacy discourse. Using the BERTopic, we identify six topics of ChatGPT discourse and, with a zero-shot classifier, categorize rationalizations as justification, denial, or trivialization. Results show that justification dominates across most topics, denial emerges primarily in adversarial contexts (e.g., lawsuits), and trivialization is most common when privacy risks are salient. A Chi-square analysis confirms a significant post-ban shift, with justification increasing and denial decreasing. These findings extend spillover theory by conceptualizing it as a discursive spillover and enrich cognitive dissonance theory by demonstrating how regulatory actions reshape the public mix of rationalizations. These findings offer guidance for communication and policy.
When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.
Comments
09-Cybersecurity