People accessing health advice online often feel they have no choice but to put their trust in the websites they visit despite having misgivings, according to a qualitative study conducted at the University of Southampton. Researchers found that users felt that convenience, ease of use, and crucially a lack of alternatives outweigh their concerns about privacy and data security. The findings, published in the peer-reviewed journal Behavioral Sciences, indicate that individuals engage with digital health platforms under a sense of practical necessity rather than genuine confidence in digital safeguards, exhibiting what researchers identified as digital resignation toward pervasive tracking features such as cookies.
The investigation explored the feelings of people towards internet-based technologies and sites that make use of artificial intelligence, particularly in e-Health applications. To capture these perspectives, the research team conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews over an eight-month period in 2023 with 22 adult participants based in the United Kingdom. The study sample was specifically composed to examine whether lived experience with psychological challenges influenced digital trust, dividing the cohort between eight participants with lived experience of a mental health condition and 14 participants without such experience.
When analyzing the interview data, the researchers found there was no clear difference in levels of trust between the two mental health status groups. Lead author and psychologist Dr. Emma Palmer-Cooper explained the study’s initial hypothesis and its unexpected outcome, stating: “Our original concern was that people with serious mental health conditions, who can sometimes display more mistrust of others and of ‘cyber’ technologies, may be more likely to avoid IBTs designed to help them due to a level of paranoia or fear. We set up our study to explore this possibility, but our results showed this as less of an issue and that more general concerns about trust in digital technologies – common to both participant groups – were more prevalent.”
A pronounced theme across both cohorts was a pervasive feeling of digital resignation, particularly concerning mandatory cookie agreements and tracking permissions. Twelve out of the 22 participants declared a lack of trust in the internet generally, but they continued to use internet-based technologies and to abide by cookie settings they were not comfortable with. Participants justified this behavior by citing the convenience and time-saving benefits of online platforms, while explicitly acknowledging an ongoing trade-off between privacy and trust on one hand, versus enhanced user experience and greater functionality on the other.
In describing their interaction with online consent mechanisms, some participants felt they had little choice but to accept cookies in order to navigate modern web services. As one participant put it: “If you don’t accept, you can’t use the majority of online services.” Another participant shared a similar sentiment regarding the necessity of using online tools despite personal skepticism, stating: “And I don’t trust it but as I said before, I have to in a way trust it in order to get to do what I want to do.” Furthermore, one interviewee described the design of cookie banners as being intentionally structured to “wear you down” over time.
Underlying these individual frustrations was an overall consensus among participants that an inherent imbalance exists between large companies and end-users, leading to persistent trust issues. The interviewees linked their trust in technology directly to their trust in commercial organisations, expressing recurrent concerns about possible commercial influence behind online health advice and applications. This perception of corporate dominance left users feeling that they had minimal power to negotiate terms of use or protect their personal information while seeking health assistance online.
In addition to privacy and commercial influence, participants addressed the expanding presence of artificial intelligence in healthcare. Throughout the interviews, people spoke of wanting a balance between AI and human contact. They expressed anxiety about AI’s capabilities, noting in particular a fear of its misuse and the troubling prospect of AI replacing human employees within healthcare and related services. In response to these perceived risks, two participants raised the issue of a need for greater regulation to oversee the deployment of artificial intelligence systems.
The broader implications of these user attitudes were highlighted by Professor Mark Weal of the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton, who stated: “Our study shows there are clear ethical considerations for developers of online technologies and for the prescribers of eHealth interventions. It’s important online systems are developed responsibly to provide trust and genuine user autonomy.” In light of these challenges, the researchers called on health professionals to thoroughly understand data usage and privacy in the systems they recommend to patients, while ensuring they balance clinical support between human and eHealth provision.
Subject of Research: Public trust and privacy perceptions in online health technologies
Article Title: Users engage with online health platforms despite privacy concerns
Article References: Users engage with online health platforms despite privacy concerns. Original publication (Bibliographic details unavailable.)
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: Not provided
Keywords: Digital Health, Online Privacy, eHealth, Mental Health, Artificial Intelligence, Data Security, University of Southampton, Behavioral Sciences, Users, engage, online, health
News Source: Ophelia Keating. (November 6, 2026). Online Health Platform Users Compromise Privacy for Access and Convenience. Scienmag.
