Gender-Based Heterogeneity in Youth Privacy-Protective Behavior for Smart Voice Assistants: Evidence from Multigroup PLS-SEM

Smart Voice assistants (SVAs) are widely adopted by youth, yet privacy decision-making in these environments is often characterized by competing considerations rather than clear-cut preferences. While our prior research has examined privacy risks, benefits, trust, and self-efficacy as distinct predictors of behavior, less attention has been paid to how these factors combine into higher-level tension that shapes privacy outcomes. This study introduces a negotiation-based framework for understanding youth privacy decision-making with SVAs by operationalizing two composite indices: the Risk-Benefit Tension Index (RBTI) and the Control-Acceptance Tension Index (CATI), using survey data from 469 Canadian youth aged 16-24. We examine the distribution of these indices and their relationship with privacy-protective behavior and SVA usage. Results show that both indices are meaningfully associated with protective action. Frequent SVA usage exhibits more benefit-dominant and acceptance-leaning negotiation profiles, suggesting that convenience-driven engagement may come at the expense of perceived control. By reframing privacy decision-making as a process of negotiation rather than inconsistency, this study offers a complementary perspective on the privacy paradox and provides a compact measurement approach for capturing how youth navigate competing privacy pressures in voice-enabled ecosystems.

This work examines sexualised AI-generated English-speaking voices offered by a popular commercial platform. New technologies may enable sexual empowerment and greater diversity in gender expression, yet toxic masculinity, heteronormativity, and the abuse of women and LGBTQ+ people remain pervasive online. Drawing on a Feminist HCI perspective, we examine how commercial voice AI systems reproduce and circulate particular performances of gender. We conducted a listening experiment with a diverse group of listeners, combining quantitative adjective selection, qualitative free-text responses, and acoustic analysis. Participants evaluated male- and female-coded voices presented with either sexualised scripts or neutral text. Results reveal a narrow range of gender expression, largely binary and heteronormative. Female-coded voices are more frequently described using sexualised and submissive terms, while male-coded voices are more often associated with dominance and positive traits.

Speech-to-speech (S2S) models now run inside dubbing, translation, and voice agents. Unlike text models, they hear the speaker's voice, which carries the speaker's gender. A faithful system should treat a speaker as who they sound like, not as whoever usually says what they said. Testing this is harder than it looks, since most S2S models answer in a single, fixed output voice, hard-coded so it cannot drift toward a stereotype. Checking the output voice comes back clean even when the model is biased. We therefore ask two questions. When a model re-speaks the input, does the stereotype in the words shift the perceived gender of the output voice (voice rendering)? And when the model states the speaker's gender, does it follow the voice or the content (gender attribution)? We answer both with one controlled experiment crossing male and female voices with masculine-, neutral-, and feminine-stereotyped passages, on five open- and closed-source models in English, Spanish, and Mandarin. The rendered voice shows no stereotype drift. But every model decides the speaker's gender from the content, not the voice. Making the content one step more feminine (masculine -> neutral -> feminine) multiplies the odds of a "female" judgment by 1.7-24. When the content clashes with the voice, the worst model misgenders the speaker in 90% of cases. When they agree, it misgenders in only 2%. The bias thus hides in gender attribution, where fixed-voice evaluation cannot see, and where audits must look as S2S systems increasingly speak for real people.