skip to main content
10.1145/3173574.3174108acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

The Dark (Patterns) Side of UX Design

Published:21 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Interest in critical scholarship that engages with the complexity of user experience (UX) practice is rapidly expanding, yet the vocabulary for describing and assessing criticality in practice is currently lacking. In this paper, we outline and explore the limits of a specific ethical phenomenon known as "dark patterns," where user value is supplanted in favor of shareholder value. We assembled a corpus of examples of practitioner-identified dark patterns and performed a content analysis to determine the ethical concerns contained in these examples. This analysis revealed a wide range of ethical issues raised by practitioners that were frequently conflated under the umbrella term of dark patterns, while also underscoring a shared concern that UX designers could easily become complicit in manipulative or unreasonably persuasive practices. We conclude with implications for the education and practice of UX designers, and a proposal for broadening research on the ethics of user experience.

References

  1. 2013. UXPA Code of Professional Conduct. https://uxpa.org/resources/uxpa-code-professional-conductGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2017a. Hanlon's Razor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlons_razorGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 2017b. IxDA Code of Conduct. http://ixda.org/code-of-conduct/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 2017c. The Copenhagen Letter. https://copenhagenletter.orgGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Anders Albrechtslund. 2007. Ethics and technology design. Ethics and Information Technology 9, 1 (2007), 63--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Ellen Balka. 2006. Inside the Belly of the Beast: The Challenges and Successes of a Reformist Participatory Agenda. In PDC '06: Proceedings of the ninth conference on Participatory design, Vol. 1. 134--143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Jeffrey Bardzell and Shaowen Bardzell. 2013. What is "Critical" about Critical Design?. In CHI 2013. 3297--3306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Jeffrey Bardzell and Shaowen Bardzell. 2015. Humanistic HCI. Vol. 8. Morgan Claypool Publishers. 1--185 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Jeffrey Bardzell, Shaowen Bardzell, and Erik Stolterman. 2014. Reading Critical Designs: Supporting Reasoned Interpretations of Critical Design. In Proceedings of the 32Nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1951--1960. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Shaowen Bardzell, Jeffrey Bardzell, Jodi Forlizzi, John Zimmerman, and John Antanitis. 2012. Critical design and critical theory. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference on - DIS '12. 288. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Steve Benford, Matt Adams, Ju Row Farr, Nick Tandavanitj, Kirsty Jennings, Chris Greenhalgh, Bob Anderson, Rachel Jacobs, Mike Golembewski, Marina Jirotka, Bernd Carsten Stahl, Job Timmermans, and Gabriella Giannachi. 2015. The Ethical Implications of HCI's Turn to the Cultural. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 22, 5 (2015), 1--37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Daniel Berdichevsky and Erik Neuenschwander. 1999. Toward an ethics of persuasive technology. Commun. ACM 42, 5 (1999), 51--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Alan Borning and Michael Muller. 2012. Next steps for value sensitive design. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '12. 1125. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Glenn A. Bowen. 2009. Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal 9, 2 (2009), 27--40.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. N. Bowman. 2014. The ethics of UX research. http://www.uxbooth.com/articles/ethics-ux-research/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Harry Brignull. 2013. Dark Patterns: inside the interfaces designed to trick you. http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/29/4640308/ dark-patterns-inside-the-interfaces-designed-to-trick-youGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Harry Brignull, Marc Miquel, Jeremy Rosenberg, and James Offer. 2015. Dark Patterns - User Interfaces Designed to Trick People. http://darkpatterns.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Lucas Colusso, Gary Hsieh, Sean A Munson, Cindy L Bennet, Cynthia L Bennett, Gary Hsieh, and Sean A Munson. 2017. Translational Resources: Reducing the Gap Between Academic Research and HCI Practice. In DIS'17: Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM Press, New York, NY. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Janet Davis. 2009. Design methods for ethical persuasive computing. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology - Persuasive '09. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Lynn Dombrowski, Ellie Harmon, and Sarah Fox. 2016. Social Justice-Oriented Interaction Design. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems - DIS '16 (2016), 656--671. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby. 2013. Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Daniel Fallman. 2011. The new good: Exploring the potential of philosophy of technology to contribute to Human-Computer interaction. In Proceedings of the 29th SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1051--1060. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Gabriele Ferri, Jeffrey Bardzell, Shaowen Bardzell, and Stephanie Louraine. 2014. Analyzing critical designs: categories, distinctions, and canons of exemplars. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems. ACM, ACM Press, New York, NY, 355--364. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Alain Findeli. 2001. Rethinking Design Education for the 21st Century: Theoretical, Methodological, and Ethical Discussion. Design Issues 17, 1 (2001), 5--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Mary Flanagan and Helen Nissanbaum. 2014. Values at play in digital games. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. BJ Fogg. 2003. Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. 1--282 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. BJ Fogg. 2009. A behavior model for persuasive design. In Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Christopher Frauenberger, Marjo Rauhala, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2016. In-Action Ethics. Interacting with Computers 29, 2 (2016), 220--236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Batya Friedman, Peter Kahn, and Alan Borning. 2002. Value sensitive design: Theory and methods. University of Washington technical report December (2002), 2--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Batya Friedman, Peter H Kahn Jr, and Peter H. Kahn, Jr. 2003. Human Values, Ethics, and Design. In The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, Julie A Jacko and Andrew Sears (Eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1177--1201. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Ken Garland. 1964. First Things First. http://www.designishistory.com/1960/first-things-first/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. William W. Gaver. 1991. Technology affordances. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems Reaching through technology - CHI '91 (1991), 79--84. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Barney G. Glaser and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Vol. 1. 271 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Colin M. Gray. 2016. "It's More of a Mindset Than a Method": UX Practitioners' Conception of Design Methods. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2016), 4044--4055. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Colin M. Gray and Elizabeth Boling. 2016. Inscribing ethics and values in designs for learning: a problematic. Educational Technology Research and Development 64, 5 (2016), 969--1001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Colin M. Gray and Yubo Kou. 2017. UX Practitioners' Engagement with Intermediate-Level Knowledge. In DIS '17 Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. 13--17. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Colin M. Gray, Erik Stolterman, and Martin A. Siegel. 2014. Reprioritizing the relationship between HCI research and practice. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems - DIS '14. 725--734. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Saul Greenberg, Sebastian Boring, Jo Vermeulen, and Jakub Dostal. 2014. Dark patterns in proxemic interactions: a critical perspective. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on Designing interactive systems. ACM, 523--532. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. David Hankerson, Andrea R Marshall, Jennifer Booker, Houda El Mimouni, Imani Walker, and Jennifer A Rode. 2016. Does Technology Have Race? Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2016), 473--486. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Steve Harrison, Phoebe Sengers, and Deborah Tatar. 2011. Making epistemological trouble: Third-paradigm HCI as successor science. Interacting with Computers 23, 5 (2011), 385--392. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Danny Jeremiah. 2017. Southern Rail has a UX problem. https://medium.com/@dannyjeremiah/ southern-rail-has-a-ux-problem-461c8915f8a9Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. N. Kellingley. Ethics and the user experience-ethics and the individual. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/ ethics-and-the-user-experience-ethics-and-the-individualGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Andrew Koenig. 1995. Patterns and antipatterns. Journal of Object-Oriented Programming 8, 1 (1995), 46--48.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Jes A. Koepfler, Luke Stark, Paul Dourish, Phoebe Sengers, and Katie Shilton. 2014. Values&design in HCI education (workshop). In CHI'14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 127--130. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Kari Kuutti and Liam J. Bannon. 2014. The turn to practice in HCI. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '14. 3543--3552. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Benjamin Lafreniere, Parmit K. Chilana, Adam Fourney, and Michael A. Terry. 2015. These Aren't the Commands You're Looking For: Addressing False Feedforward in Feature-Rich Software. In UIST '15: Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software&Technology. 619--628. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Carine Lallemand, Guillaume Gronier, and Vincent Koenig. 2015. User experience: A concept without consensus? Exploring practitioners' perspectives through an international survey. Computers in Human Behavior 43 (2015), 35--48. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Christopher A. Le Dantec, Erika S. Poole, and Susan P. Wyche. 2009. Values as lived experience: Evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI '09). ACM, ACM Press, New York, NY, 1141--1150. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Peter Lloyd. 2009. Ethical imagination and design. In Design Studies, Janet McDonnell and Peter Lloyd (Eds.). Vol. 30. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 154--168.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Dan Lockton, David Harrison, and Neville Stanton. 2008. Design with Intent : Persuasive Technology in a Wider Context. In Persuasive Technology. Vol. 5033 LNCS. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 274--278. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Ken McPhail. 2001. The other objective of ethics education: Re-humanising the accounting profession-A study of ethics education in law, engineering, medicine and accountancy. Journal of Business Ethics 34, 3--4 (2001), 279--298.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Tara Mullaney and Erik Stolterman. 2014. Why 'design research practice' is not design as we know it. Design Research Society (2014). http://www.drs2014.org/media/654248/0266-file1.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Cosmin Munteanu, Heather Molyneaux, Wendy Moncur, Mario Romero, Susan O'Donnell, and John Vines. 2015. Situational Ethics: Re-thinking Approaches to Formal Ethics Requirements for Human-Computer Interaction. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2015), 105--114. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Chris Nodder. 2013. Evil by Design: Interaction design to lead us into temptation. John Wiley&Sons, Inc., Indianapolis, IN. 303 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Donald A. Norman. 1986. User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-computer Interaction. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. James Pierce, Phoebe Sengers, Tad Hirsch, Tom Jenkins, William Gaver, and Carl DiSalvo. 2015. Expanding and Refining Design and Criticality in HCI. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '15. ACM, 2083--2092. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Johan Redström. 2006. Persuasive Design: Fringes and Foundations. In Persuasive Technology. 112--122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Noam Scheiber. 2017. How Uber Uses Psychological Tricks to Push Its Drivers' Buttons. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/02/technology/ uber-drivers-psychological-tricks.html?_r=1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Dan Schlosser. 2015. LinkedIn Dark Patterns. https://medium.com/@danrschlosser/linkedin-dark-patterns-3ae726fe1462Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Phoebe Sengers, Kirsten Boehner, Shay David, and Joseph 'Jofish' Kaye. 2005. Reflective design. In Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing between sense and sensibility - CC '05. ACM, ACM Press, New York, NY, 49--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Phoebe Sengers, John McCarthy, and Paul Dourish. 2006. Reflective HCI: Articulating an Agenda for Critical Practice. In Extended Abstracts CHI 2006. ACM, 1683--1686. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Katie Shilton. 2012. Values Levers: Building Ethics Into Design. Science, Technology&Human Values 38, 3 (2012), 374--397.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. Katie Shilton and Sara Anderson. 2016. Blended, not bossy: Ethics roles, responsibilities and expertise in design. Interacting with Computers 29, 1 (2016), 71--79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Katie Shilton, Jes A. Koepfler, and Kenneth R. Fleischmann. 2014. How to see values in social computing: methods for studying values dimensions. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work&social computing. ACM, 426--435. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Natasha Singer. 2016. When Websites Won't Take No for an Answer. https: //www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/technology/personaltech/ when-websites-wont-take-no-for-an-answer.html?mcubz= 0&_r=0Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Erik Stolterman. 2008. The nature of design practice and implications for interaction design research. International Journal of Design 2, 1 (2008), 55--65.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Erik Stolterman and Harold G Nelson. 2012. The Design Way. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Mary E Sunderland, J Ahn, C Carson, and W Kastenberg. 2013. Making Ethics Explicit: Relocating Ethics to the Core of Engineering Education. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Conference. Atlanta, GA, 23.881.1--23.881.11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Aimee van Wynsberghe. 2013. Designing Robots for Care: Care Centered Value-Sensitive Design. Science and Engineering Ethics 19, 2 (2013), 407--433.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  70. Aimee van Wynsberghe and Scott Robbins. 2014. Ethicist as designer: a pragmatic approach to ethics in the lab. Sci Eng Ethics 20, 4 (2014), 947--961.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  71. Alyssa Vance. 2016. Dark Patterns by the Boston Globe. https://rationalconspiracy.com/2016/04/24/dark-patterns-by-the-boston-globe/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Peter-Paul Verbeek. 2006. Materializing Morality: Design Ethics and Technological Mediation. Science, Technology&Human Values 31, 3 (2006), 361--380.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. Jo Vermeulen and Kris Luyten. 2013. Crossing the bridge over Norman's gulf of execution: revealing feedforward's true identity. In CHI'13: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1931--1940. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  74. Vasillis Vlachokyriakos, Clara Crivellaro, Christopher A Le Dantec, Eric Gordon, Pete Wright, and Patrick Olivier. 2016. Digital Civics: Citizen Empowerment With and Through Technology. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2016), 1096--1099. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  75. Jenny Waycott, Cosmin Munteanu, Hilary Davis, Anja Thieme, Wendy Moncur, Roisin McNaney, John Vines, and Stacy Branham. 2016. Ethical Encounters in Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI EA '16. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 3387--3394. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Marty J Wolf. 2016. The ACM Code of Ethics: A Call to Action. Association for Computing Machinery. Communications of the ACM 59, 12 (2016), 6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The Dark (Patterns) Side of UX Design

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2018
        8489 pages
        ISBN:9781450356206
        DOI:10.1145/3173574

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 21 April 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate666of2,590submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader