Dark-pattern family · 12 patterns
Privileges business-favoured actions through visual, linguistic or structural presentation of choices and information.
This family groups related interface mechanisms for learning and journey review. It is not a legal category and does not make every matching interface unlawful. Start with the mechanism, then examine the complete decision, audience, effect and EU rule actually within scope.
Recognition framework
Review the complete decision surface rather than one colour or sentence. Compare prominence, order, wording, defaults and information timing across all realistic options. Then test whether users can predict outcomes and compare material consequences on mobile, with keyboard navigation and with assistive technology.
Visual hierarchy, recommendation and progressive disclosure are ordinary design tools. Concern increases when presentation conceals a consequence, misstates an action or makes a realistic alternative materially harder to understand. The effect and surrounding evidence remain essential.
EU legal and policy context
A family name helps teams compare interface mechanisms. It is not an EU legal category, and similarity to an example does not establish that a current rule has been infringed or that a future Digital Fairness Act will use the same label.
The UCPD and any relevant sector instrument require their own scope, conduct, information and likely-effect assessment. The complete journey and evidence matter; a taxonomy match is only a prompt to investigate.
The Commission is preparing a legislative DFA initiative and currently places a proposal in Q4 2026. That planning date is indicative, and no published proposal yet creates a family-specific duty.
The call for evidence discusses possible policy responses to digital fairness concerns. Options, consultation questions and stakeholder submissions are not Commission proposals or present obligations.
Final instrument form, scope, definitions, thresholds, enforcement, transition and application remain unknown until primary legislative text is published and validated.
Journey coverage
Review the state before the decision, the controls and information available at that moment, the immediate result and any later account or billing consequence. Journey links below show where this family appears in the published taxonomy; they do not imply that every product or every stage contains the mechanism.
8 related patterns
Checkout concentrates price, add-ons, urgency, identity and the final payment action. Review should begin with the state carried into the basket and finish only when the order, receipt and account state agree. A control that appears clear in isolation can still be misleading when a fee arrives late, a removed item returns or the final button does more than its label predicts.
Open the journey guide →6 related patterns
Pricing review starts before checkout. Search cards, campaign landing pages, recommendation logic, comparison tables and membership offers can each shape the price a person understands. Teams should reconstruct the comparable payable amount, the basis of every saving or popularity claim and the information available when a product first becomes a realistic option.
Open the journey guide →5 related patterns
Signup is where access, identity, permissions and first-run choices meet. A useful review follows the user from the promise made before registration through every required field, default, consent request and first-use screen. The question is not whether signup is persuasive, but whether people can understand what is necessary, what is optional and what each control will do before they commit.
Open the journey guide →4 related patterns
Cancellation review compares the represented exit with the steps, channels and final account state needed to complete it. Legitimate identity or account-protection controls can add proportionate friction, but retention prompts, language and technical dead ends should not prevent a clear instruction from reaching a durable outcome.
Open the journey guide →5 related patterns
A subscription is a lifecycle rather than one purchase screen. Trial conversion, billing period, renewal, plan changes and continued access must be understood together. The interface should enable a person to distinguish a one-off payment from a recurring arrangement and compare the present benefit with later price and exit consequences.
Open the journey guide →2 related patterns
Account settings determine whether earlier choices remain controllable. Privacy preferences, exports, deletion, support and content controls often span several channels and states. Review therefore needs to test persistence and actual system outcomes, not only whether a settings label or help article exists.
Open the journey guide →Pattern directory
Each detail page contains two fictional interface comparisons, practical recognition and exclusion criteria, a fairer alternative, review questions and a legal-status map that keeps editorial taxonomy separate from current law and the announced DFA process.
Distinct products, services, permissions or purposes are grouped under one choice so the user cannot readily understand or select them separately. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Bundled optionsThe volume or organisation of options or information makes meaningful comparison impractical and channels users toward a default or business-favoured path. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Choice or information overloadMaterial guidance is presented in a language or level of complexity that makes informed choice materially harder for the target user. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Complex or inaccessible languageOption labels use shame, guilt, fear or asymmetric emotional framing to move the user away from the outcome they would otherwise choose. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: ConfirmshamingA promotional or biased action is presented as ordinary content or as a different control, causing interaction under a mistaken understanding. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Disguised advertisement or actionParallel options are presented as if one were hierarchically primary, giving a business-favoured option materially greater visual or interactive prominence. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: False hierarchyA control does not let the user reasonably predict its material outcome before activation. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Feedforward ambiguityInformation relevant to the decision is absent or presented so ineffectively that it is unlikely to inform the user at the decision point. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Hidden informationA comparison or prior price creates an inaccurate or insufficiently explained impression of savings. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Misleading reference pricingA business-favoured option with a plausible adverse consequence is active before a deliberate user choice. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Preselection and defaultsA more expensive or profitable option is made the practical focal choice through preselection, visual prominence or obscured lower-cost alternatives. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Pressured upsellingA question or control uses confusing, reversed or leading semantics so the user's likely interpretation may not match the resulting choice. The label describes a recurring design mechanism; whether a particular implementation is harmful or unlawful depends on the complete journey, audience, evidence and rules within scope.
2 visual examples
See visual examples: Trick questionEvidence-led workflow
Evidence base