Scarcity — Wikipedia states: “In economics, scarcity “refers to the basic fact of life that there exists only a finite amount of human and nonhuman resources which the best technical knowledge is capable of using to produce only limited maximum amounts of each economic good.” In product experiences this is typically observed when product experiences inflate the lack of availability of a product or item in order to subliminally or indirectly influence users to purchase it (reinforcing the fear that the volume is dwindling or is about to expire). This at times is even further emphasized by flashy promotions that clearly indicate “Last in Stock” or “While Stocks Last”, all with the intent to drive the user/consumer to purchase something that in reality may still continue to exist for quite some time. An example of situations such as these occur on Travel Booking Sites where there’s an alarming indication of how many people are checking a particular flight or hotel room at a certain rate, all with the goal to enforce both a sense of scarcity but also urgency to the user/consumer and pressure the booking experience. In all the Travel Booking Applications I’ve worked on thus far, Scarcity was something that we’ve always avoided. We performed market canvasing and research, conducted user interviews, all with the intent to understand users’ needs, and ultimately delivered solutions that provided reliable data, as opposed to manipulating the users’ in their journey (and to this these White Label Travel Booking products are still being used by a variety of organizations). In Product Design, and in particular when it comes to e-commerce experiences for instance, the team crafting the product solution and experience for the user, should always keep in mind that the goal is for it to be useful, understandable and desirable, therefore indicating availability suffices, without manipulating the situation into forcing users to purchase at the risk of “missing out”. Another thing to consider is, when a product or item is indeed sold out, indicate it clearly and possibly provide information of when it will be replenished (another tactic is to give the user an opportunity to be made aware of when it will become available once more or even create an in product notification for the user once more indicating its availability).

Forced Action — typically this Dark Pattern is illustrated when users are forced to do something either tangential or non-essential in order to complete their task. Case in point: as a user of Duolingo, I engage with that app on a daily basis, because I’m invested in my constant learning endeavors, and want to practice the language I’m learning. That is and has always been my goal. I appreciate the way the app has been crafted, and understand the overall progress strategy the content creators have placed as part of that syllabus. However, and while I appreciate the social aspect of communicating with others in a different language and the whole user community that Duolingo is attempting to build, I personally have no desire to be on a leaderboard, or for that matter be in a competition with anyone as I go through that learning experience. Personally, the challenge I create when using an application is with myself, and I’m driven by my goals, not by how others are pursuing their own. The fact that I’m essentially forced to be a part of that experience and can’t extricate myself from it, has been one of the most frustrating and perplexing aspects of that particular product (and I’m not using the freemium version). Something to always keep in mind when crafting robust product solutions is the fact that they should be credible and inclusive, which means empowering users with the option to bow out of certain experiences that are not directly affiliated with the main purpose of why they use a particular solution. Another case in point, when using Amazon for instance, part of the product experience includes giving the users an opportunity to read through reviews of a particular item. This is an aspect that enhances the product experience, but not essential for what I intend to do in that particular part of the flow. I can purchase any product without having to read those reviews, unless I choose to do so.

Sneaking — this is a particular insidious Dark Pattern, in the sense that it typically introduces items which invariably translate into additional costs to the user as a transaction is about to take place, or at times without the user noticing they’re there. A good example is for instance the typical car purchase experience (this example does not contemplate the app driven experiences crafted by Carvana or Vroom, since I personally have not purchased vehicles using those). In my experience of purchasing vehicles, both in North America and in Europe, I’ve come to realize that dealers will negotiate the cost of the vehicle, taking into consideration a variety of factors (including down payment, vehicle swaps, credit rating, amongst other factors). However when the time comes to actually start the process of signing documentation and for the financial transaction to occur, additional fees are always revealed. Typically additional services and costs are added on, altering what was discussed quite considerably. Essentially the user goes through a journey of understanding what it takes to make a considerable purchase, only to get thwarted at the end of that journey by a variety of additional costs which are never indicated before. It’s a sneaking tactic which can elicit a couple of reactions: for some users they accept the situation as is, and add it to whatever scenario was already established, even if it creates a sense of entrapment, while for others it comes across as a dishonest ploy and they choose to abandon the engagement. As someone who has done the latter, what this invariably causes is a sense of mistrust and lack of credibility with a brand and/or Organization. And for Organizations who are in the arena of creating retention and long standing relationships with their users, this is positively the worst type of relationship to create with users. When crafting product solutions, if there are indeed additional fees added on checkout experiences for instance, always explain what those are, and why they’re being included, and do so fairly early in the process so the user understands why they’re appearing as part of that journey. Remember to always be transparent and honest with users.

Urgency — countless product experiences will toy with the sense of urgency to elicit more user adherence (or create a spike of influx of users). While some of the sense of urgency is tied with certain campaigns that occur for a limited period of time (such as a seasonal promotion for example), consistently using this ploy on a particular product experience creates a nefarious engagement from the user with the product itself. Taking as an example Travel Booking Experiences, I noticed that while booking an Activity to do in Portland, I was met with a timer indicating how long I had to actually do my checkout (for an activity that was being booked with 7 months in advance). The goal is of course, to create a sense of urgency for the user, triggering the sense that there will be a missed opportunity if that checkout experience does not occur promptly. Users should be able to check out at their own pace and consider whatever information they want, allowing for the checkout to be performed when they’re ready to do so, not because there’s a timer being displayed in the UI forcing them into a sense of panic or fear of missing out. A better example of how to use Urgency as a positive prompt can be demonstrated by Criterion. They have established regular sales which occur seasonally, where they clearly indicate to the user the timeliness (and timeline) of the promotion, and the discount that it entails. The user has a choice to move ahead with it during that timeline or dismiss it. Either way, it has become part of their business tactic, one that typically resonates with cinephiles whom they cater for.

Obstruction — another nefarious pattern, which essentially entails creating scenarios where it’s easy for users to access a situation but simultaneously make it fairly difficult for users to abandon it or opt out from it. Case in point: gym memberships. While working on fitness apps, and as a user myself, I realized how the process of joining a gym was always fairly easy for the user, which included payment promotions, minimal information to set up an account, and rather straightforward payment methods. However the disengagement of the membership has always been a different part of the process, where the user is tasked and has the onus of producing a fair amount of proof as to why they need to abandon the membership. Wanting to cancel is simply not an option. The same goes for signing up for newsletters, where the process to join a distribution list is fairly straightforward, but the process to abandon it is never quite as seamless or prompt (and at times it seems like those emails never end). In this latter example, legislation around GDPR has been making strides in protecting users’ data, but deliberately creating scenarios where users are locked into particular situations ultimately produces a counter-productive user experience, one that is permeated with mistrust, and one that ultimately results in abandonment and avoidance.