Repeated prompting
Declined add-on repeatedly reappears
A fictional booking journey restores a previously declined insurance offer at passenger details, payment and final confirmation.
Individual HTML example · Nagging
Notification request returns on every screen
A fictional app shows the same full-screen notification request after the user declines, then repeats it on each of the next four screens.
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real company and is not a legal finding or safe harbour.
Notification request returns on every screen
A fictional app shows the same full-screen notification request after the user declines, then repeats it on each of the next four screens.
Turn on notifications. The request returns immediately after every decline.. Not now. Continue without notifications
Notifications remain off. The app records the refusal and explains where the setting can be changed later.. Continue without notifications. Not now. What happens next, expanded: Activating “Continue without notifications” produces the outcome stated on the control.
Why the first version can mislead: The user’s earlier refusal loses effect while the request keeps interrupting the signup journey. The practical influence comes from recurrence, not from one isolated prompt: “The request returns immediately after every decline.” Repeated interruption can wear down a refusal and prevent ordinary use of the service.
What a fairer design does: Respect the decision for a meaningful period and keep any later change available in settings.
Show annotated differences (2)
Potentially problematic version
- Continue without notificationsIn “Notification request returns on every screen”, this element shows how repeated prompting can shape the decision.
Neutral alternative
- What happens next, expanded: Activating “Continue without notifications” produces the outcome stated on the control.In “Notification request returns on every screen”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
- Which event causes “Not now” to return after refusal, and how long does the product persist that refusal?
- Can the dialog be dismissed, what action does each control trigger, and what later state confirms or contradicts “The prompt purpose is materially the same across occurrences”?
- After an explicit refusal, when may the prompt legitimately return, and how would that changed context remain distinct from “Required safety or legal notice”?
Complete pattern context
How this example relates to Repeated prompting
A business-favoured request repeatedly interrupts the user after decline, dismissal or non-response without a durable way to stop it. 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
Account deletion obstruction
Deactivation presented as deletion
A fictional platform labels a control “Delete account”, but the confirmation only hides the profile and leaves data and reactivation available indefinitely.
Account deletion obstruction
Deletion buried behind an unsupported ticket
A fictional retailer places account deletion behind six help pages and requires a support ticket containing an order number even for users who never ordered.
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