Interface interference · European Union
Preselection and defaults
Preselection sets a choice before the user actively makes it. Defaults can reduce effort and are not inherently unlawful, but EU rules expressly restrict some pre-ticked extra payments and require valid consent in relevant data contexts. Risk rises when a default adds cost, sharing or commitment and the alternative is hard to notice or select.
- Family
- Interface interference
- Also known as
- Journey stages
Definition
What is this pattern?
A 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.
How it works
A business-favoured option with a plausible adverse consequence is active before a deliberate user choice. The system chooses a consequential option before the user acts, allowing inattention or momentum to preserve a paid, data-sharing or longer-term state.
Warning signs
- The state is selected at first relevant presentation.
- The default benefits the business or increases cost, data use, tracking or commitment.
- The user must act to avoid the consequence.
Potential harms
- The shopper may pay for an add-on through inattention rather than active agreement.
- A user may commit to a larger upfront payment without making an active billing-period choice.
Learn by comparison
What does this look like?
These fictional examples make the design mechanism easier to recognise. They do not depict a real company and do not establish that an individual interface is unlawful.
Illustrative example 1 · Electronics checkout
A fictional retailer preselects a €12 protection plan and includes it in the total before the shopper has made a distinct choice.
Potential consumer harm: The shopper may pay for an add-on through inattention rather than active agreement.
Illustrative example 2 · Streaming plan selection
A fictional streaming service opens with the annual plan selected and highlights a monthly-equivalent figure while the payable annual total is smaller.
Potential consumer harm: A user may commit to a larger upfront payment without making an active billing-period choice.
Illustrative example 3 · Ticket checkout
A paid cancellation-protection add-on is pre-ticked in the order summary and must be removed through a small control away from the displayed total.
Potential consumer harm: The buyer may pay for an optional extra without making an express, informed selection.
Illustrative example 4 · Account settings
A new sharing feature is enabled by default and the off setting is placed in a separate advanced-settings area with no explanation during rollout.
Potential consumer harm: People may disclose information or adopt a setting they would not have actively chosen.
Paid protection preselected in basket
A fictional retailer preselects a €12 protection plan and includes it in the total before the shopper has made a distinct choice.
Order total · €211. A €12 protection plan is already active in the basket.. Protection included. Add protection for €12
Order total · €199. Protection is optional, unselected and priced beside its control.. Amount affected: €12: Add protection for €12. Add protection for €12. Protection included. Payable total and selected items, expanded: The summary shows the line items and total before “Add protection for €12” is activated.
Why the first version can mislead: The presentation changes what the user can notice or predict at the checkout decision. The problematic state shows: “A €12 protection plan is already active in the basket.” Its influence should be tested by comparing the consequence and usability of “Protection included” with “Add protection for €12”. The shopper may pay for an add-on through inattention rather than active agreement.
What a fairer design does: Leave paid extras unselected, describe their price and require a deliberate choice before adding them.
Show annotated differences (2)
- Add protection for €12In “Paid protection preselected in basket”, this element shows how preselection or bad default can shape the decision.
- Payable total and selected items, expanded: The summary shows the line items and total before “Add protection for €12” is activated.In “Paid protection preselected in basket”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
- Do “Protection included” and “Add protection for €12” receive comparable prominence and explain their consequences before activation?
- Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “The state is selected at first relevant presentation”?
- What neutral rendering or comprehension result would falsify the classification, particularly in light of “Consumer-protective or neutral default”?
Annual plan active by default
A fictional streaming service opens with the annual plan selected and highlights a monthly-equivalent figure while the payable annual total is smaller.
Choose your plan. Annual billing is active before the user chooses and its total is visually secondary.. Selected: Annual selected. Not selected: Select monthly or annual
Choose a billing period. No option is preselected; monthly and annual totals appear beside each radio control.. Not selected: Select monthly or annual. Not selected: Annual selected. Choice consequences, expanded: The consequence of selecting “Select monthly or annual” is displayed beside the option.
Why the first version can mislead: The presentation changes what the user can notice or predict at the subscription decision. The problematic state shows: “Annual billing is active before the user chooses and its total is visually secondary.” Its influence should be tested by comparing the consequence and usability of “Annual selected” with “Select monthly or annual”. A user may commit to a larger upfront payment without making an active billing-period choice.
What a fairer design does: Start with no paid plan selected and show both payable totals and billing periods consistently.
Show annotated differences (2)
- Not selected: Select monthly or annualIn “Annual plan active by default”, this element shows how preselection or bad default can shape the decision.
- Choice consequences, expanded: The consequence of selecting “Select monthly or annual” is displayed beside the option.In “Annual plan active by default”, this element keeps the clearer alternative visible at the same decision point.
Review questions (3)
- Do “Annual selected” and “Select monthly or annual” receive comparable prominence and explain their consequences before activation?
- Capture every peer option, its default state and visual prominence; do those states support “The default benefits the business or increases cost, data use, tracking or commitment”?
- What neutral rendering or comprehension result would falsify the classification, particularly in light of “state restored from a prior explicit user choice”?
What is a fairer alternative?
Use a neutral initial state for optional payments or consent-dependent choices and require an affirmative selection. For convenience defaults that are permitted, explain the effect, provide a nearby alternative and make later reversal straightforward.
Legal and information status
Legal position at a glance
Defaults have strong behavioural effects, but their legal treatment is context-specific. Teams should identify whether a rule requires express action, whether the default changes price or data use, and whether the design makes the user's own choice legible and reversible.
CRD Article 22
Express rule
Additional payments require express consent; the Directive addresses consent inferred through default options the consumer must reject.
GDPR Articles 4(11) and 7
Possible risk indicator
Where consent is the legal basis, it must be freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous and demonstrated by the controller.
Evidence layers and open questions
Applicable law, enforcement records, policy preparation, stakeholder input, editorial analysis and unknown future details remain visibly distinct.
Current lawCurrent law
CRD Article 22 requires express consumer consent for extra payments before the consumer is bound and provides reimbursement where consent was inferred from a default option. GDPR consent requires an affirmative, freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous indication where consent is the relied-on basis. DSA Article 25 and DMA rules may apply to particular platforms or designated gatekeepers.
Current enforcementCurrent law
Enforcement depends on the relevant rule and authority. The Commission-commissioned 2022 study found preselection among frequently observed patterns, but that research did not itself determine legal liability for every observed interface.
Officially announcedOfficially announced
Interface design and dark patterns are in DFA preparation. Topic identification in preparation material is not a published DFA duty.
Under considerationUnder consideration
The DFA call for evidence considers possible policy responses relevant to preselection and defaults but expressly does not prejudge the Commission's decision. It establishes no pattern-specific duty, threshold or remedy.
Stakeholder proposalStakeholder proposal
The factual consultation report records respondent submissions. It is not a Commission position. Any respondent proposal addressing preselection and defaults remains stakeholder input unless it is later adopted in published Commission text.
Editorial analysisEditorial analysis
Behavioural research treats defaults as influential choice architecture. That insight helps prioritize testing but is not a substitute for the legal elements.
UnknownUnknown
No published DFA proposal establishes a final definition, actor scope, legal threshold, duty, remedy, transition rule or application date for preselection and defaults. Those details remain unknown pending primary legislative text.
Context matters
Context and boundary cases
- The state is selected at first relevant presentation.
- The default benefits the business or increases cost, data use, tracking or commitment.
- The user must act to avoid the consequence.
- Exclude or qualify the label where consumer-protective or neutral default.
- Exclude or qualify the label where state restored from a prior explicit user choice.
When a similar design can serve a legitimate purpose
- A similar design should not be classified this way where consumer-protective or neutral default.
- A similar design should not be classified this way where state restored from a prior explicit user choice.
Operational review
What teams should review
- Teams
- Do “Protection included” and “Add protection for €12” receive comparable prominence and explain their consequences before activation?
- Compare the basket before and after the action, including total and line items; does the mutation satisfy “The state is selected at first relevant presentation”?
- What neutral rendering or comprehension result would falsify the classification, particularly in light of “Consumer-protective or neutral default”?
- Do “Annual selected” and “Select monthly or annual” receive comparable prominence and explain their consequences before activation?
- Capture every peer option, its default state and visual prominence; do those states support “The default benefits the business or increases cost, data use, tracking or commitment”?
- What neutral rendering or comprehension result would falsify the classification, particularly in light of “state restored from a prior explicit user choice”?
- Which complete journey evidence supports or contradicts the preselection or bad default classification?
Evidence to retain
- Versioned captures of the Checkout and Subscription states before, during and after the relevant decision
- Configuration, content and event records supporting the observed preselection or bad default mechanism
- Responsive, keyboard and assistive-technology review of every material option and consequence
- Price-component, offer-version and calculation records linked to the captured screen
- Control defaults, validation rules and consent or selection state changes
Legal map and implementation tools
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
- Consumer Rights DirectiveEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Directive 2011/83/EU; CELEX 02011L0083-20220528
- General Data Protection RegulationEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Regulation (EU) 2016/679; CELEX 32016R0679
- Digital Services ActEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Regulation (EU) 2022/2065; CELEX 32022R2065
- Digital Markets ActEuropean Parliament and Council of the European Union · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Regulation (EU) 2022/1925; CELEX 32022R1925
- Behavioural study on unfair commercial practices in the digital environmentEuropean Commission, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · DOI 10.2838/859030; ISBN 978-92-76-52316-1
- Review of EU consumer lawEuropean Commission, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers · Primary · checked 2026-09-14
- 2030 Consumer Agenda and action plan for consumers in the Single MarketEuropean Commission · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · COM(2025) 848 final; CELEX 52025DC0848
- Digital Fairness Act: call for evidence for an impact assessmentEuropean Commission · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Initiative 14622; Ares(2025)6275573
- Digital Fairness Act: factual summary report of the public consultationEuropean Commission · Primary · checked 2026-08-09 · Ares(2025)11434262
- Commission work programme 2026: Europe's Independence MomentEuropean Commission · Primary · checked 2026-09-14 · COM(2025) 870 final; CELEX 52025DC0870; Annex I item 30