The Interface Conundrum and Dark Patterns

The Interface Conundrum 

Challenges and the use of dark patterns.

Interface is an important connection between humans and machines but also machines to machines. Interface instantiates information, how it is produced, works and embodied into technology.

One challenging interface aspect is dark patterns, which are patterns that are designed by using the interface specifically to deceive users into purchasing items or doing actions they might not have done (Darkpatterns, 2014). Individuals are studying our behaviours online, our movements and our habits and use this knowledge to set ‘traps’ for said users (Puchalska, 2014).  However, this study of habits has already occurred prior to the web and could be suggested as continuation. One controversial, but famous study would be Milgram (1963) who studied humans and obedience of a higher authority. Duhigg (2012) states that almost every retailer or company has some form of department that is devoted to understanding not just shopping habits, but personal lifestyles too; for increased market efficiency. But are dark patterns all that bad?  Mesibov (2013) suggests that the design of dark patterns could be learned and used for good in fact.

Another aspect is tethering. We are tethered to companies such as Google, and their interface is designed in a way that penetrates privacy. The products we use on Google and their multiple platforms collect data from us and are intruding into our privacy. The more we use Google, the more information it collects on us (Ketcham and Kelly, 2010). This includes their other platforms such as Google Maps and Gmail (Rosenfeld, 2014). We are constantly monitored, yet we allow this to happen as we stay loyal to certain companies. Even if we use alternative platforms, we are still coupled with Facebook or Twitter data to use the application (Larson, 2014).

Another challenge that interface poses for critical media analysis is highlighted by Drucker (2011) that the design of an interface to support human or a humanistic approach is still an on-going issue but a central issue nonetheless. Interface designs are catered to us not as humans, but more as subjects who potentially hinder the true value of data being collected and more suitable design of interfaces. Drucker (2011) also reiterates that the challenge for humanists is to express the theory and designs of interfaces.

Bibliography

Darkpatterns.org, (2014). Dark Patterns - User Interfaces Designed to Trick People. [online]. ( http://darkpatterns.org/). (Accessed 2 November 2014).Drucker, J. (2011). Humanities approaches to interface theory. Culture Machine. 12(0.  pp. 1-20.Duhigg, C. (2012). How Companies Learn Your Secrets. The New York Times. [online]. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0).  (Accessed 6 November 2014).Ketcham, C. and Kelly, T. (2010). The More You Use Google, the More Google Knows About You.[online].Available at: http://www.alternet.org/story/146398/the_more_you_use_google%2C_the_more_google_knows_about_you  [Accessed 8 November 2014].Larson, S. (2014). Are There Too Many Social Networks?. [online]. Readwrite.com. Available at: http://readwrite.com/2014/01/07/are-there-too-many-social-networks [Accessed 8 Nov. 2014].Mesibov, M. (2013). Using Dark Patterns for Good UX Booth. [online]. Available at:  http://www.uxbooth.com/articles/using-dark-patterns-for-good/ [Accessed 6 November 2014].Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral Study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), pp.371-378.Puchalska, E. (2014). Dark Patterns in UX – The Jedi Way. [Blog]. Usability Tools. Available at: http://blog.usabilitytools.com/dark-patterns-in-ux/#sthash.p41qIQnu.dpbs [Accessed 8 November 2014].Rosenfeld, S. (2014). 4 ways Google is destroying privacy and collecting your data. [online]. Available at: http://www.salon.com/2014/02/05/4_ways_google_is_destroying_privacy_and_collecting_your_data_partner/  [Accessed 8 November 2014].