Funnel & CRO
Flag the dark patterns eroding trust, and your long-term conversion.
- Category
- Funnel & CRO
- Signup
- None
- Your data
- Stays in your browser
- Also in
- Claude, via MCP
How do you check a site for dark patterns?
Check for eight common dark patterns: hidden auto-renewal, hidden costs, confirmshaming, disguised ads, hard cancellation, fake urgency, pre-selected add-ons and trick wording. Integrity = (8 − patterns found) ÷ 8 × 100. Three patterns give a score of 63 and high trust risk; India and the US both treat many of these as unfair practices.
3 dark patterns is a trust liability, and increasingly a legal one under consumer-protection rules. Short-term conversions bought this way cost more in refunds, churn and brand damage than they earn.
Dark patterns inflate the metric you optimise and degrade the ones you don’t measure, trust, retention and word of mouth. They’re also increasingly regulated.
About this calculator
Manipulative UX patterns can lift a short-term metric while quietly costing you refunds, chargebacks, churn, and reviews you never connect back to the original design decision. This checker runs your experience against eight well-documented dark patterns, forced continuity, hidden costs, confirmshaming, and more, and gives you an integrity score plus a trust-risk read.
How to use it
- Tick any dark pattern currently present in your experience: forced continuity, hidden costs revealed late, confirmshaming, disguised ads or fake system messages, hard-to-find cancellation, fake urgency, pre-selected paid add-ons, or trick button wording.
- Read the count of patterns found, the integrity score, and the trust-risk level.
- Treat any flagged pattern as a priority removal, not just a design nitpick, several carry regulatory exposure as well as reputational cost.
Methodology
The integrity score is (total patterns minus flagged patterns) ÷ total patterns × 100, so each of the eight patterns is weighted equally and removing any one improves the score by the same fixed increment.
Zero patterns found is graded "good" with low trust risk, 1-2 patterns "warn" with moderate risk, and 3+ "bad" with high risk, reflecting that these patterns compound: a page with several dark patterns creates cumulative distrust well beyond what any single pattern causes alone.
This is a presence checklist, not a measured impact on churn or chargebacks, it flags known problematic patterns; the actual cost to your business depends on your specific audience, market, and applicable consumer-protection regulation.
Interface integrity score
Integrity = (8 − Patterns found) ÷ 8 × 100 Band: 0 found good, 1 to 2 warn, 3+ high risk
- Patterns found
- How many of the eight listed dark patterns appear anywhere in your sign-up, checkout, subscription or cancellation flows.
Each pattern counts equally, which is a simplification; some carry far more legal and trust risk than others. This is a presence check, not legal advice. Have a lawyer review flows that involve subscriptions, consent or pricing.
Worked example: three patterns found
A subscription product shows a "No thanks, I don't want to grow" decline link, makes cancellation possible only by email to support, and runs a countdown timer that resets on every visit.
- Patterns found = 3 (confirmshaming, hard cancellation, fake urgency).
- Integrity = (8 − 3) ÷ 8 × 100 = 62.5, shown as 63.
- Band: 3 or more, high risk.
- Removing all three returns the score to 100.
Each of these may lift a short-term metric but costs trust, invites complaints and can breach consumer rules. Replace them with honest equivalents: a plain decline link, self-serve cancellation and real deadlines. Check the rest of the flow with the friction point identifier.
Honest alternatives to common dark patterns
Most dark patterns have an honest version that still works:
- Urgency: show a real deadline, such as when a price actually changes.
- Renewals: state the renewal date and price clearly and send a reminder.
- Cancellation: let people cancel the way they signed up, and offer a pause or downgrade.
- Add-ons: offer them unticked with a clear benefit.
- Declines: use a neutral "No thanks".
Honest flows reduce refunds, chargebacks and complaints, which often outweighs any short-term lift.
Dark pattern rules in India vs the US
India's Central Consumer Protection Authority notified the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023 on 30 November 2023, listing 13 specified dark patterns, including false urgency, and applying them to platforms, advertisers and sellers offering goods or services in India (summary by JSA). Consent obtained by deceptive design is also a concern under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
The US Federal Trade Commission published a staff report, Bringing Dark Patterns to Light, in September 2022, describing deceptive design practices it has pursued. Several states also regulate automatic renewals and cancellation. Subscription businesses selling into the US should review sign-up and cancellation flows carefully.
Common dark pattern mistakes
- Treating a pattern as acceptable because a competitor uses it.
- Measuring only conversion and ignoring refunds, chargebacks and complaints.
- Leaving old timers or pre-ticked boxes in place after a campaign ends.
- Making cancellation harder than sign-up.
- Using guilt-tripping copy on decline buttons.
Sources
- CCPA issues Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, JSA Advocates and Solicitors. Accessed 2026-10-19.
- Bringing Dark Patterns to Light, US Federal Trade Commission. Accessed 2026-10-19.
FAQ
Not universally, but several (deceptive cancellation flows, hidden costs, pre-selected paid add-ons) fall under increasingly active consumer-protection enforcement in the US, EU, and UK. Even where a specific pattern isn't clearly illegal in your jurisdiction, regulatory scrutiny of dark patterns broadly is rising.
Dark patterns typically work by exploiting a moment of inattention or urgency, confirmshaming lifts opt-in rate, hidden costs reduce cart abandonment at the moment they're hidden. The cost shows up later and elsewhere, in refund requests, chargebacks, support tickets, and reviews, which is why the short-term metric looks good while the underlying trust erodes.
Genuine urgency (a real, verifiable low-stock count or an actual deadline) is legitimate persuasion. It becomes a dark pattern when the countdown resets, the stock number is fabricated, or the deadline isn't real, the deception, not the urgency framing itself, is what the checker flags.
Because they push people into actions they would not otherwise take. The cost shows up later as churn, refunds, complaints and lost trust.
No. A real deadline or limited stock stated truthfully is fine. Fake timers and invented scarcity are the problem.
Numbers looking off?
If the model says one thing and the pipeline says another, that gap is usually where the revenue is. A 30-minute call finds it.
It starts with a 30-minute call. Pick a time below.