Dark Patterns in UX

🚨 Dark Patterns in UX: Why They Hurt More Than They Help Dark patterns are tricks in design that make users do things they didn’t intend—like signing up for paid plans without warning or accidentally sharing more data than they wanted. While they may deliver short-term gains, the long-term impact is clear: 🚫 users lose trust and switch to more ethical products. Some common dark patterns to watch out for: 🚫 Forced continuity → free trial quietly turns into a paid subscription 🚫 Roach motel → easy to sign up, painful to cancel 🚫 Sneak into basket → hidden items added at checkout 🚫 Deliberate misdirection → focusing attention on costly options, hiding cheaper ones 🚫 Privacy zuckering → tricking users into oversharing personal data Instead of relying on tricks, build trust. Be transparent about pricing, make cancellation as easy as sign-up, and respect user privacy. In the long run, ethical design wins loyalty. 🖼️ Dark Patterns by Krisztina Szerovay #UX #design #productdesign #uxdesign #UI #uidesign

Booked bus ticket, spotted dark pattern in redBus app. Why the manipulation, redBus? Was booking a bus ticket from Chennai to Coimbatore for my weekend hometown visit. Selected my seat, went to the payment page to review the booking one last time. Hit the back button. This appeared: "Don't go back!" With an illustration showing two people sitting comfortably in seats and me (highlighted in yellow) standing beside them looking sad and left out. Below it: "We have already blocked the selected seat(s) for you. If you go back, you need to select different seat(s)." Two CTAs: → "Continue booking" (big red button) → "Back to seat selection" ( less prominent) Let's break down the manipulation: 1. "Don't go back!" - Creates panic, like I'm making a terrible mistake by reviewing my booking. 2. The sad illustration - Shows me standing while others sit comfortably. Pure emotional manipulation. 3. "We have already blocked the seat for you" - Guilt trip. Makes it sound like they did me a favor, and going back wastes their effort. 4. "You need to select different seat(s)" - False. The seat is blocked for MY session. I can select the same seat again if I return. They're implying I'll lose it forever. 5. Red button vs grey button - Visual hierarchy pushing me toward "Continue booking" instead of letting me review. Why this is a dark pattern: I went back because I wanted to review something. That's normal user behavior. RedBus is treating a normal action (going back) as a problem and using fear, guilt, and misleading information to stop me. #redBus #DarkPatterns #UXDesign

Let's talk about dark/deceptive patterns... It's a term coined in 2010 by Harry Brignull to describe when user interfaces are crafted to trick users into doing things. Brignull wanted to recognize the negative impact these manipulative patterns had on users and expose the unethical practices, educate the public, and foster a more transparent digital landscape. How often do we examine our own work for these patterns? Are we teaching the next up and coming generation of designers and technologist how to identify and avoid these patterns? Do we know how to identify them? This morning I was purchasing a holiday gift, quickly trying to complete an online transaction before I tackled my laundry list of items (as I expect many experience this time of year.) As I entered my credit card information into the web form, I paused briefly, as there was a section for "Add Tip". Mind you, this is an e-commerce store. I continued entering my credit card information and took one last look at the form, when I noticed that the "Custom Tip" field was pre-populated with a $7.49 amount. 😱 Dark/Deceptive pattern indeed. So what makes this a dark pattern? 1. Users don't typically expect to see an "Add Tip" field when shopping an e-commerce site, as this not a common practice online or in retail stores. (It is a practice within the service industry or when working directly with people.) 2. A custom default was created by the company and not made obvious to the user. 3. The user had to proactively select "None" to remove the tip that was added by the company. 4. (not pictured) The itemized bill was collapsed, so to not show the user that the price had increased and a tip was added. As we roll into the busy holiday season, which is quickly followed by open enrollment for insurance and then tax season, it's important that users/consumers watch out for these patterns. And it's even more important that we as designers/technologist educate ourselves and practice ethical design. You can learn more about dark/deceptive patterns here: https://lnkd.in/gcZviv28 (I've purposely left out the company name, but trust that they are receiving feedback from me.) #darkpatterns #deceptivepatterns #uxdesign #uidesign #ecommerce

Dark patterns boost this quarter’s metrics—then bill you next quarter’s trust. I’ve been tracking the fallout from the “growth hacks” that probably felt like cracking some secret code until the process servers start showing. The pattern is eerily consistent across industries. Take Amazon’s internal “Project Iliad”—named after Homer’s epic about a decade-long war. (Flair for drama, much?) The FTC alleges Amazon designed a complex cancellation process to deter Prime subscribers from unsubscribing, using what the agency described only slightly hyperbolically as a “four-page, six-click, fifteen-option cancellation process.” Amazon’s case is still working through federal court. Then there’s Epic Games—hit with $245 million in refunds for using dark patterns that tricked Fortnite players into unwanted purchases. The FTC distributed $72 million in December 2024 and another $126 million in June 2025 to affected users. But the bigger shift? Regulators aren’t just slapping wrists anymore. The UK’s DMCC Act—in effect since April 6, 2025—now allows the CMA to impose fines up to 10% of global annual turnover for consumer law breaches—putting dark patterns within range of antitrust violations. Here’s what teams ship when they think they’re being clever: → Roach motels: Easy to get in, maze to get out → Drip pricing: When the $19 advertised price becomes $47 at checkout → Fake urgency: Countdowns that reset every hour → Hidden exits: Burying free/cheaper plans and the $0 tip option But there’s a bigger cost: 👎🏼 Short-term conversion bumps followed by support ticket floods 👎🏼 Refund programs that dwarf the original “gains” 👎🏼 Legal exposure that makes product-market fit irrelevant 👎🏼 Brand damage that takes years to repair The most efficient teams I’ve worked with ask one question before shipping: “Would users choose this if everything were perfectly transparent?” Swipe below for ethical alternatives that also simply work better long-term. If you’re banking on dark patterns helping you to hit your numbers, then you don’t have a conversion problem—you have a value problem. Comment “DARK UX” if you want me to send you this PDF. I’m curious: What’s the last dark UX you encountered that made you question a brand’s integrity? #ethicaldesign #uxdesign #darkpatterns #designethics #darkux ⸻ 👋🏼 Hi, I’m Dane—your source for UX and career tips. ❤️ Was this helpful? A 👍🏼 would be thuper kewl. 🔄 Share to help others (or for easy access later). ➕ Follow for more like this in your feed every day.

Some agencies call it "conversion optimization." I call it theft. The line between persuasion and manipulation is clear. Persuasion shows customers why your product solves their problem. Manipulation tricks them into buying something they didn't want. Or hides costs until it's too late. After 16 years optimizing digital experiences, I've seen both. Surprise fees that appear at checkout after customers already committed. Unsubscribe flows requiring 7 clicks and a phone call. Countdown timers that reset when you refresh the page. "No thanks, I don't want to save money" buttons designed to shame you into compliance. These are dark patterns. Interfaces designed to trick users into actions they don't want. Dark patterns "work." In the short term. But they quietly destroy three things: customer lifetime value, brand trust, and word-of-mouth. When you optimize for conversions at the expense of trust, you're not optimizing. You're borrowing against your future. The brands winning long-term treat every interaction as a trust deposit. Transparent pricing. Clear cancellation. Honest urgency. That's real optimization.

You know that feeling when a website makes you do something you didn't actually want to do? That's not an accident. It's engineered. These are called dark patterns, and they're design tactics that manipulate users into actions that benefit the company, not the user. They're everywhere, and they're deeply unethical. Here are the ones you've definitely encountered: 🪤 Roach Motel - Easy to subscribe in 2 clicks, but canceling requires calling customer service 😱 Confirmshaming - "No thanks, I hate saving money" or "No, I don't want to protect my family" ⏰ Fake Urgency - "Only 2 rooms left!" when it's not true, or countdown timers that magically reset 📧 Forced Continuity - Free trials that auto-convert to paid subscriptions without clear warning ☑️ Preselected Options - Boxes already checked for newsletters, data sharing, and upsells you never asked for Why do companies use them? Because they work. They increase conversions, reduce cancellations, and boost short-term metrics. But here's what they also do: They erode trust. They create resentment. They invite regulation (hello, GDPR and CCPA). And they attract customers who churn the moment they realize they've been tricked. Short-term gains from dark patterns create long-term losses in reputation and trust. The companies that win are the ones that treat users with respect. Which dark pattern annoys you most? Drop it in the comments.

🚨The cost of dark patterns? $2.5 billion! That's the historic amount Amazon will have to pay to settle Federal Trade Commission charges of deceptive methods to sign up consumers for Prime subscriptions and to make it difficult to cancel. "Get free delivery with Prime". This button was actually used to trap users into unwanted Prime subscriptions. On top of this, it took up to 7 clicks for users to cancel Prime, with many deceptive and manipulative patterns, discouraging them from doing so. A sadly classic "roach motel", aka "hard to cancel" dark pattern. On September 25, the FTC announced a record settlement - one of the largest in its history - against Amazon, for having used dark patterns in Prime subscriptions. 📍 The numbers tell the story: - $1B civil penalty (largest ever for FTC rule violations) - $1.5B in consumer refunds for 35 million affected users - Years of "sophisticated subscription traps" finally called out 📍2 senior Amazon executives, Senior Vice President Neil Lindsay and Vice President Jamil Ghani were personally liable for knowingly misleading millions of consumers, in addition to the company. 📍Amazon's own internal communications revealed the truth. Executives and employees called Prime "a bit of a shady world" and described unwanted subscriptions as "an unspoken cancer." The unsubscription path was made so complex and difficult that it was internally called "Iliad" 😅 💡The most interesting part? The settlement requires Amazon to stop using dark patterns and instead ensure: ✅ Clear decline buttons (no more confirmshaming like "No, I don't want Free Shipping") ✅ Transparent material terms upfront ✅ Cancellation as easy as sign-up ✅ Independent oversight of compliance ➡️A clear validation of what we've been advocating for at Fairpatterns for years: fairness by design is simply essential. Precisely the reason why we created our library of fair patterns: interfaces that empower users to make free and informed choices https://lnkd.in/eHY4S48x 💯 For those of us working to eliminate dark patterns, this feels like a turning point. We've moved from "nice to have" ethical design to "legally required" fair practices. The message to C-Suite, digital, marketing and product teams everywhere is clear: respect your users or face real consequences. The 35 million consumers who will get refunds prove that when we fight for fair patterns, we're fighting for real people with real money in their pockets. Kudos to Harry Brignull for leading the fight since Day 1. https://lnkd.in/e29c_Hn8 💫 Regain your freedom online

Dark Patterns & the DSA – First Higher Court Judgment under Art. 25 DSA #DarkPatterns #DSA #DigitalRegulation One of the first—if not the first—higher court decisions interpreting Art. 25 Digital Services Act (DSA) has been issued by the Higher Regional Court of Bamberg (OLG Bamberg). This ruling marks a significant step in clarifying the boundaries of manipulative design practices under the DSA. The case involved an additional ticket insurance offered on a platform when purchasing concert tickets. The court examined the following design practices: (1) The insurance was prominently highlighted. (2) If consumers chose not to opt in, they had to affirmatively reject it by clicking a button labeled “I bear the full risk” The court held: (1) The Art. 25(2) DSA exemption applies if the practice falls under the scope of the Unfair Commercial Practices (UCP) Directive, not only if it is an infringement of the UCPD. (2) But: A breach of the DSA’s standard of care (Art. 25) also constitutes a breach of Art. 5(2)(a) UCP Directive. (3) The highlighted offer alone constitutes #framing, but not an infringement. (4) The repeated prompt qualifies as soft #nagging, but not as an infringement per se. (5) However, the #combination of dark patterns —especially with the misleading implication of the “I bear the full risk” button (which ignores the buyer’s right to a refund in cases such as event cancellation) — amounts to an infringement of Art. 25 DSA. 📄 Case Reference: OLG Bamberg (3. Zivilsenat), Judgment of 05.02.2025 – 3 UKI 11/24 e 📝 Full text (in German, open access): https://lnkd.in/eyUKZpBD For further reading and academic context: - my interpretation of Art. 25 DSA in: Hofmann/Raue, DSA article by article commentary (2023 German edition / 2024 English edition) - some of these arguments were reflected in the court’s reasoning. - Dregelies, MMR 2023, p. 243 (German). Martin Husovec Alberto De Franceschi Christoph Busch João Pedro Quintais 🟥Joris van Hoboken Michael Denga Max Dregelies Prof. Dr. Mario Martini Katharina Kaesling

UX has a dark side: Deceptive patterns—UI patterns intentionally designed to deceive or confuse users for the purpose of helping the company achieve its own goal, without delivering value to the user or respecting their trust. Here, we see a simple on-off switch for a cookie consent dialog. But what is on, and what is off? In the Apple HIG, and Google’s Material Design, the switch is on when it’s flipped to the right. And the user gets further confirmation that the switch is on, by adding a color to the switch’s track. But this switch does the opposite of industry leaders—and it does so in a way that can conceivably deceive users into consenting to the use of trackers collecting their information, when they think they’re opting out. Companies believe decisions like this are beneficial to the business, but this actually increases the risk of the company getting sued—and lawsuits about this kind of thing happen often. Having clear, easy to understand design isn’t just beneficial to the users, it protects the business, as well.

Ever clicked "No thanks" and somehow still ended up subscribed? 🤔 Dark patterns are the invisible traps hiding in plain sight across the digital products we use daily. They manipulate our clicks, drain our wallets, and erode trust all while looking completely innocent. Here's what these deceptive tactics actually look like: ✅ Trick Questions Confusing wording that makes you choose the opposite of what you want ✅Sneak into Basket Hidden items added to your cart without permission ✅Roach Motel Easy to get in (subscribe), nearly impossible to get out (unsubscribe) ✅Privacy Zuckering Tricking you into sharing more personal data than intended ✅Misdirection Drawing your attention away from important information ✅Bait and Switch You click one thing, but something completely different happens The carousel breakdown shows real examples of these patterns in action from confusing unsubscribe buttons to pre-checked boxes you never asked for. As UX professionals, we face a choice every day: Design for genuine value or manipulate for short-term gains. The irony? Dark patterns might boost metrics temporarily, but they destroy the one thing no business can survive without trust. 💔 What's the worst dark pattern you've encountered recently? #UXDesign #UserExperience #DarkPatterns #ProductDesign #EthicalDesign #UXUI #DigitalEthics #DesignThinking #UserInterface #UXStrategy