Ethical Design: How to Avoid Manipulation and Harm

In the digital age, design has ceased to be merely an aesthetic practice. Today, it defines how we consume information, how we think, and even how we feel. Every button, font, or shape on a screen shapes the user experience, which can be either caring or manipulative. That is why the concept of ethical design is gradually becoming one of the key ideas in today’s culture of human–technology interaction.

A Human Being Is Not a Click Metric

Ethical design stems from a simple but crucial principle: human interests must take precedence over commercial goals. This means that interface design should be based on trust, transparency, and respect for the user’s time. Unlike traditional success metrics—such as click-through rates or session duration—an ethical approach views the user not as a “traffic unit” but as an autonomous participant in interaction.

According to researchers from the Nielsen Norman Group (2023) [4], ethical design is a practice grounded in trust: users have the right to understand what is happening and to control their own choices. In practice, however, this ideal is not always upheld. The pursuit of rapid profit growth often pushes businesses toward behavioral tricks that exploit subconscious human reactions.

Dark Patterns: When the Interface Plays Against the User

In 2010, British designer Harry Brignull introduced the term dark patterns to describe design techniques that compel users to act against their original intent [1]. Since then, the term has become an international marker of unethical practices in the digital environment.

One of the most common examples is the intrusive modal window: a bright “Yes, I want this” button contrasted with a dull, barely visible alternative. Formally, the user has a choice—but effectively, that choice has already been steered. Another example is the frequent appearance of messages like “Only two items left!” or “Offer ends in five minutes.” According to research by the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (2022) [3], this artificially induced scarcity increases the likelihood of impulsive purchases by nearly forty percent. It is a classic case of playing on the human fear of missing out (FOMO).

An interface can also manipulate through color. Green, associated with safety and the “correct” decision, is often used for action buttons, while the “Cancel” option is rendered in gray. Even worse, the refusal option may be phrased to provoke shame: “No, I don’t want a discount—I like overpaying.” Such emotionally coercive phrasing, known as confirmshaming, pressures users into compliance by inducing guilt.

Advertising disguised as ordinary content further erodes trust, blurring the line between information and promotion. Such practices have contributed to the declining credibility of online media, as users increasingly question whether they are reading journalism or sponsored material.

Behavioral Design and the Attention Economy

The most pervasive form of unethical influence is behavioral design, especially within social media. The Center for Humane Technology (2020) [2] defines this phenomenon as the “exploitation of the biochemistry of attention.” Infinite scrolling mechanisms rely on dopamine-driven reinforcement: each new post or video triggers a brief moment of pleasure that compels the user to keep scrolling. As a result, time perception dissolves, and human attention becomes a commodity sold to advertisers.

Such systems generate no real value—they merely extract the user’s energy. The paradox emerges: the very products designed to simplify life begin to complicate it, fostering dependence and mental fatigue.

Ukrainian researcher Olena Balalaieva (2023) [5] emphasizes that contemporary digital society exists within the framework of surveillance capitalism, where design functions as a tool for influencing users’ emotions and behavior. She argues that ethical design seeks to restore human autonomy and digital dignity, asserting that humanity and technology can coexist only through conscious and ethical design practices.

Ethics as Accessibility and Care

Ethical design is not limited to the absence of deception—it also entails inclusion of diverse user groups.
Websites without alternative text for images or videos without captions exclude millions of users with visual or hearing impairments.
The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.2) recommend that every digital product be accessible regardless of physical or cognitive ability. This is not only a social norm but also an expression of trust: users should feel that someone has considered their needs.

The problem of accessibility is, at its core, a problem of empathy. Ethical design, above all, is an expression of humanity—the ability to anticipate and care for the needs of others.

Responsibility Toward the Environment

A less obvious but equally vital dimension of design ethics is its environmental impact.
According to the Sustainable Web Manifesto (2021), the digital industry generates about four percent of global CO₂ emissions—almost as much as aviation. Each “heavy” webpage or unnecessary video translates into additional gigabytes of data transfer and megawatts of energy consumption.

This awareness has given rise to the Green UX movement—an approach focused on optimizing websites, reducing redundant scripts, and implementing dark themes to minimize energy use on screens. The ecological dimension of design is yet another form of respect: for the shared environment in which we all exist.

Ethical Design as Cultural Maturity

Ethical design can also be viewed as an indicator of a society’s cultural maturity. When a designer begins to think not only about making a product attractive but also about the consequences of design decisions, design becomes more than a profession—it becomes a moral stance.

An ethical approach does not reject commercial success; rather, it adds a human dimension to it. Products created with honesty and responsibility earn user loyalty because trust is the most valuable resource in an age of informational overload.

As Brignull [1] once wrote, “A designer must be aware that their decisions shape human behavior.” Responsibility begins with awareness: an interface is not just code and color—it is a social act.

Conclusions

Ethical design is neither a trend nor an abstraction—it is a necessary condition for a healthy digital environment.
It combines care, transparency, accessibility, and sustainability. Products created with these principles are not only more effective but also more humane.

Every design decision is part of a broader ecosystem—it affects the psyche, culture, and environment.
The true purpose of design, therefore, is not to make someone click a button, but to help a person remain themselves in a world governed by algorithms.

References

1. Brignull, H. (2010). Dark Patterns: User Interfaces Designed to Trick People. https://www.darkpatterns.org
2. Center for Humane Technology. (2020). The Problem of Manipulative Design. https://www.humanetech.com
3. Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). (2022). Online Choice Architecture: How Digital Design Can Harm Consumers. https://www.gov.uk
4. Nielsen Norman Group. (2023). Ethical Design for UX Professionals: Transparency, Inclusion, and Trust. https://www.nngroup.com
5. Balalaieva, O. (2023). Ethical Design and the Digital Society: Reflection on Human Activity in the Modern World. Humanitarian Studies: Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy, 11(1), 8–15. DOI: 10.31548/hspedagog14(110.31548/hspedagog14(1).2023.8-15).2023.8-15