Privacy research has debated whether privacy decision-making is determined by users' stable preferences (i.e., individual traits), privacy calculus (i.e., cost-benefit analysis), or "responses on the spot" that vary across contexts. This study focuses on two factors-default setting as a contextual factor and regulatory focus as an individual difference factor-and examines the degree to which these factors affect social media users' decision-making when using privacy preference settings in a fictitious social networking site. The results, based on two experimental studies (study 1, n = 414; study 2, n = 213), show that default settings significantly affect users' privacy preferences, such that users choose the defaults or alternatives proximal to them. Study 2 shows that regulatory focus also affects privacy decisions, such that users with a strong promotion focus select options favoring a higher social networking utility, perceiving lesser cognitive efforts and more confidence in decisions. Finally, we find a significant interaction effect between default setting and regulatory focus on perceived effort and confidence, suggesting that the default effect is contingent on users' goal orientations (operationalized as regulatory focus). We discuss the implications for research and practice.