Activity messages
Fabricated named signup notification
A fictional course page rotates messages such as “Mia from Berlin just enrolled” using invented names and locations rather than completed enrolments.
Individual HTML example · Social proof
Randomised recent-purchase notification
A fictional store displays “12 people bought this in the last hour” using a random number unrelated to completed orders.
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real company and is not a legal finding or safe harbour.
Randomised recent-purchase notification
A fictional store displays “12 people bought this in the last hour” using a random number unrelated to completed orders.
Popular right now. A generated number is presented as recent customer activity.. 12 bought this hour. Claim basis, collapsed
Verified activity information. The message states its period and is shown only when live order data supports it.. 8 purchases in the past 24 hours. Claim basis, expanded: The relevant population, period, inventory or offer state is presented with the message.. View the source and period for “8 purchases in the past 24 hours”
Why the first version can mislead: The interface asks the user to rely on other people’s behaviour or approval. The cue “12 bought this hour” has persuasive meaning only if its population, period, metric and relationship match the represented claim. The panel instead says: “A generated number is presented as recent customer activity.” Unsupported activity can create false confidence and urgency around the purchase.
What a fairer design does: Use activity messages only when they are accurate, timely, relevant and supported by a defined data source.
Show annotated differences (2)
Potentially problematic version
- Claim basis, collapsedIn “Randomised recent-purchase notification”, this element shows how activity messages can shape the decision.
Neutral alternative
- View the source and period for “8 purchases in the past 24 hours”In “Randomised recent-purchase notification”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
- Which source record substantiates “12 bought this hour”, including its population, period, metric and any commercial relationship?
- Record the claim, timestamp, data source and post-claim state; which evidence supports “The message describes actions by other people as current or recent”?
- Can the claim be reproduced from a defined population and period, or does the evidence instead fit “Static aggregate popularity claim”?
Complete pattern context
How this example relates to Activity messages
Claims about recent or current actions by other users are used to steer the decision, particularly where authenticity, timing or relevance is unsupported. 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.
The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, harms, fair design principles, evidence questions and the relevant EU legal information layers. The example page isolates one scenario so it can be shared and discussed without reproducing the complete library on one page.
Continue comparing
Related examples
Open this example
Popularity claims
“Most popular” has no defined metric
A fictional service labels its highest-margin plan “Most popular” without recording sales, selection period or the population being measured.
Popularity claims
Bestseller badge follows margin rather than sales
A fictional marketplace assigns “Bestseller” to whichever item yields the highest commission, regardless of units sold.
Sources and provenance for this example
Evidence base
Sources
- Dark commercial patternsOrganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 336
- Unfair Commercial Practices DirectiveEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Directive 2005/29/EC; CELEX 02005L0029-20220528