Lumos: Illuminating UX Light Patterns
In user experience, a dark pattern is often described as a design that makes you sign up for accounts, give private information, and even buy things unintentionally. I would go even farther to say that any design that deliberately misdirects you or misleads you is dabbling in dark arts. There’s even a website called Dark Patterns devoted to calling out some of the more egregious offenders.
So, it got me thinking: what could I do as a UX designer to bring a little more light into my design patterns? You know, be a little less Slytherin, a little more Gryffindor? Here’s what came to mind:
Consciously add friction
There are interactions that make it slower for people to achieve their goals. In contrast, a frictionless user experience is seen as an inherent good. But is it always? Sometimes, a little friction gives a person time to stop and think about what’s happening, which can be really valuable in complex processes. For example, being able to review your contact information one last time before you submit your job application online might be seen as redundant, but can mean the difference between a job interview and a missed opportunity.
Hold your scroll
When I consider the hours I’ve spent mindlessly thumbing through an infinitely scrolling page of content, I honestly feel that there is something insidious about the hijacking of human intent that happens with this dark pattern. As designers, we could choose to design less addictive experiences, couldn’t we? Some designers are doing just that: a beautiful example I’ve seen recently of a website consciously holding the scroll is The New Potato.
Skip the fine print
If a person is hoping to click on a link to unsubscribe, let them at least see it. It’s fine to communicate options and alternatives, but don’t bury your unsubscribe options in 6 point text. Or, as in Amazon’s dark example, don’t bury your unsubscribe option by using low contrast grey text:
Don’t bait and switch
The more I interact with LinkedIn, the more I feel that bait and switch seems to be one of their primary design principles.
I recently tried to add a contact, and was brought to a page where my only option was to download the LinkedIn app.
So, I was curious to see what would happen on my laptop. Instead of coming to my profile, I was brought to a confusing, multistep page where I was encouraged to add hundreds of my private contacts. All of my contacts were automatically selected, and the most prominent button at the bottom of the page was labelled Add connection(s).
Just a thought: if a person is trying to add a connection, and they come to another page that says Add connection(s), how many people would fail to notice that they’re about to add information they don’t intend to add?
Even a slight change in language–Add more connection(s), for example–would lighten this pattern up considerably.
Being brave
It’s not easy being a Gryffindor. A Gryffindor needs to be brave. As designers, do we have the courage to say no when we’re being asked to design something that intends to mislead people? If the answer is no, I don’t think all hope is lost. I honestly believe that courage can be cultivated, and the way you do it is by observing people when they come into contact with something you’ve designed.
There’s nothing quite like having a person tear a strip out of your UX dark pattern to remind you of what really matters.
