Full length article Fuzzy Facebook privacy boundaries: Exploring mediated lurking, vague-booking, and Facebook privacy management Jeffrey T. Child * , Shawn C. Starcher Kent State University, PO Box 5190, Kent, OH 44242, USA article info Article history: Received 1 May 2015 Received in revised form 18 August 2015 Accepted 24 August 2015 Available online xxx Keywords: Disclosure Privacy Communication privacy management (CPM) theory Facebook privacy management Concern about mediated lurking Strategic ambiguity abstract Managing privacy in the interconnected digital interaction environment of Facebook can be a complex yet vital endeavor. This study utilizes the theoretical framework of Communication Privacy Management (CPM) theory to explore relationships between concern about mediated lurking, strategic ambiguity (or vague-booking) on Facebook, and Facebook privacy management. The study explores three hypotheses. Overall, 383 participants completed an online survey instrument. Greater concern about mediated lurking was related to more Facebook privacy management. More frequent use of strategic ambiguity on Facebook was related to less Facebook privacy management. Individuals who were more highly con- cerned about mediated lurking were also more likely to employ more frequent use of strategic ambiguity on Facebook. Men engaged in significantly greater use of strategic ambiguity on Facebook and enacted significantly less Facebook privacy management than did women. Implications and future research related to Facebook privacy management from a CPM perspective are explored. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Human interaction today increasingly includes the use of Face- book and other types of social media to maintain relationships (Webb, Ledbetter, & Norwood, 2015). In particular, Facebook con- tinues to be the most popular social media site (Edison Research, 2012; Facebook, 2015; Nielson, 2011). Facebook notes that by the end of 2014 there were over 1.39 billion active users of the site on a monthly basis, averaging 890 million active users every day (Facebook, 2015). Given the growth in use of Facebook, it is not uncommon for people to engage in mediated interactions on the site with friends, family, acquaintances, romantic interests, teach- ers, colleagues, businesses, and other types of relationships (Ball, Wazner, & Servoss, 2013; Child & Westermann, 2013; Fife, LaCava, & Nelson, 2013; Frampton & Child, 2013; Pempek, Yermolayeva, & Calvert, 2009). Engaging in effective privacy management in this type of interconnected digital interaction environment can be a complex yet vital endeavor to preventing privacy breakdowns (Child, 2015; Child, Haridakis, & Petronio, 2012; Child & Petronio, 2011). Effective privacy management can be difficult when interacting on Facebook because people's networks are diverse and the privacy management practices are often varied for different people based on the relationships, roles, contexts, and the functions of in- teractions (Child, Duck, Andrews, Butauski, & Petronio, in press, Petronio, 2002). Facebook is a context where both known and unknown audiences can gain access to posted context, increasing the possibility for privacy breakdowns (Child et al., 2012; Child & Petronio, 2011). Further, many people inappropriately assume others understand their privacy expectations versus explicitly coordinating privacy rules with others, which can lead to more breakdowns in effective privacy management (Steuber & McLaren, 2015). This study explores how users maintain an adequate and appropriate level of Facebook privacy management to hopefully prevent breakdowns in effective privacy management from occurring. More specifically, we utilize the theoretical framework of Communication Privacy Management (CPM) theory to explore re- lationships between concern about mediated lurking, strategic ambiguity or vague-booking on Facebook, and Facebook privacy management. 1. Communication privacy management theory and Facebook privacy Private information is defined in CPM theory as any information that makes people feel some level of vulnerability, thereby result- ing in the desire to control the further dissemination of that * Corresponding author. Kent State University, School of Communication Studies, PO Box 5190, Kent, OH 44242, USA. E-mail addresses: jchild@kent.edu (J.T. Child), sstarch3@kent.edu (S.C. Starcher). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Computers in Human Behavior journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.035 0747-5632/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Computers in Human Behavior 54 (2016) 1e8