Feedforward ambiguity
“Continue” places a paid order
A fictional checkout ends with a button labelled only “Continue”, although activating it immediately places the $86 order.
Individual HTML example · Interface interference
Sharing toggle has no visible state meaning
A fictional profile uses a switch labelled “Visibility” without saying whether the current position makes activity public or private.
This is an original fictional comparison. It depicts no real business and is not a regulator finding, statutory category or legal safe harbour.
Sharing toggle has no visible state meaning
A fictional profile uses a switch labelled “Visibility” without saying whether the current position makes activity public or private.
Visibility. The switch position has no explanatory state or audience.. On. Unconfirmed state: On
Activity visibility · Private. The control names the current audience and the alternative outcome.. Change to public. Saved state: Change to public. Persisted account state, expanded: The saved state behind “Change to public” remains consistent after refresh and across supported channels.
Why the first version can mislead: The presentation changes what the user can notice or predict at the account management decision. The problematic state shows: “The switch position has no explanatory state or audience.” Its influence should be tested by comparing the consequence and usability of “On” with “Change to public”. A person may expose account activity while believing they restricted it.
What a fairer design does: State the current audience and the effect of changing the control before saving.
Show annotated differences (4)
Potentially problematic version
- The switch position has no explanatory state or audience.Why this state matters: The presentation changes what the user can notice or predict at the account management decision. The problematic state shows: “The switch position has no explanatory state or audience.” Its influence should be tested by comparing the consequence and usability of “On” with “Change to public”. A person may expose account activity while believing they restricted it.
- Unconfirmed state: OnReview prompt: Do “On” and “Change to public” receive comparable prominence and explain their consequences before activation?
Neutral alternative
- The control names the current audience and the alternative outcome.Fairer design: State the current audience and the effect of changing the control before saving.
- Persisted account state, expanded: The saved state behind “Change to public” remains consistent after refresh and across supported channels.Review prompt: Test the control across refresh, device and account states; is “Label and nearby explanation fail to communicate that outcome” still observable after persistence is considered?
Review questions (3)
- Do “On” and “Change to public” receive comparable prominence and explain their consequences before activation?
- Test the control across refresh, device and account states; is “Label and nearby explanation fail to communicate that outcome” still observable after persistence is considered?
- What neutral rendering or comprehension result would falsify the classification, particularly in light of “clearly disclosed intermediate step before any consequence”?
Complete practice context
How this example relates to Feedforward ambiguity
A control does not let the user reasonably predict its material outcome before activation. This is a design and research taxonomy for learning and evidence review, not a statutory offence label or an automatic finding that an interface is unlawful.
The full guide explains inclusion and exclusion criteria, potential harms, fairer design, evidence questions and separate Australian 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
Bundled options
Ticket and travel pass presented as one package
A fictional ticket seller offers a concert ticket only through a control that also adds a city travel pass, although the travel component is separately deliverable and not required for entry.
Bundled options
Support and migration locked into one plan
A fictional service offers a core plan only as a bundle with premium support and data migration, while implying those extras can be removed later although no controls exist.
Sources and provenance for this example
Evidence base
Sources
- An Ontology of Dark Patterns KnowledgeGray et al.; ACM CHI 2024 · Secondary · checked 2026-09-14 · DOI 10.1145/3613904.3642436; arXiv:2309.09640
- Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Act 2026Federal Register of Legislation · Primary · checked 2026-09-14 · C2026A00064