Abstract :

The rapid expansion of digital interfaces has positioned visual communication design as a central force in shaping user behavior through increasingly sophisticated forms of visual persuasion. Contemporary interfaces did not merely present information but actively structure choices through visual hierarchy, interaction flows, and algorithmic mediation, raising critical ethical concerns. The existing body of research remained fragmented, with inconsistent conceptualizations of persuasive versus manipulative design, limited empirical validation across platforms, and insufficient attention to cultural contexts. This study aimed to critically synthesize the literature on ethical issues in digital communication design, with a particular focus on dark patterns, user autonomy, and trust, while advancing a design-oriented perspective grounded in visual communication. Employing a narrative literature review (NLR) approach, the study systematically analyzed 47 selected articles from an initial corpus of 849 publications, using iterative search strategies, citation chaining, and thematic analysis to identify patterns, tensions, and gaps. The findings revealed five dominant themes: the proliferation of dark patterns as systemic manipulative strategies; the emergence of ethical design principles centered on transparency and user control; the limitations of current regulatory frameworks; the central role of trust as a key outcome; and the marginalization of cultural perspectives. Despite conceptual advances, the field remained methodologically fragmented and lacks integration between design practice, ethics, and regulation. This study contributed by proposing the Ethical Visual Communication Framework, which integrated visual interface design, persuasion mechanisms, user cognition, ethical principles, and regulatory context into a unified model. The framework repositioned visual communication design as a critical locus of ethical intervention, offering both theoretical advancement and practical guidance for developing more responsible, human-centered digital environments.

---

Keywords :

Dark Patterns, Ethical Design Methodology, Manipulative Interfaces, Persuasive Design, Visual Communication Design

---

References :

1. Meirezaldi O. Dark Patterns Reconsidered: A Cross-Taxonomic and Conceptual Mapping for Ethical Interface Design. Telaah Bisnis. 2025;26(1):11. doi:10.35917/tb.v26i1.586
2. Zaheer S. Ethical Ux Design Preventing Manipulative Interfaces and Promoting User Trust. Int J Eng Technol Res Manag. 2019;3(10):43–51. doi:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15251711.
3. Benner D, Schöbel S, Janson A, Leimeister JM. How to Achieve Ethical Persuasive Design: A Review and Theoretical Propositions for Information Systems. AIS Trans Hum-Comput Interact. 2022;14(4):548–77. doi:10.17705/1thci.00179
4. Sánchez Chamorro L, Bongard-Blanchy K, Koenig V. Ethical tensions in UX design practice: exploring the fine line between persuasion and manipulation in online interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM designing interactive systems conference. 2023. p. 2408–22.
5. Nie L, Zhao Y, Li C, Luo X, Liu Y. Shadows in the Interface: A Comprehensive Study on Dark Patterns. In: Proceedings of the ACM on Software Engineering. 2024. p. 204–25. doi:10.1145/3643736
6. Gray CM, Gunawan JT, Schäfer R, Bielova N, Sanchez Chamorro L, Seaborn K, et al. Mobilizing research and regulatory action on dark patterns and deceptive design practices. In. 2024. p. 1–6.
7. Spasovski M, Jönsson O. Automated “Dark Patterns” in User Experience (UX): Exploring AI-Driven Manipulative Design. Malmo University; 2025.
8. Pérez E. Unethical Design in TikTok and Its Connection to Surveillance Capitalism and Collective Intelligence. Adv Mark Cust Relatsh Manag E-Serv Book Ser. 2024;135–64. doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-6945-6.ch006
9. Trzaskowski J. Manipulation by design. Electron Mark. 2024;34(1). doi:10.1007/s12525-024-00699-y
10. Sa R. Hidden Traps in Digital Financial Services: Exploring Dark Patterns and Their Impact on Users. Asia Pac Econ Manag Rev. 2025;2(6). doi:10.62177/apemr.v2i6.981
11. Spahn AA. And Lead Us (Not) into Persuasion…? Persuasive Technology and the Ethics of Communication. Sci Eng Ethics. 2012;18(4):633–50. doi:10.1007/S11948-011-9278-Y
12. Mildner T, Cooney OM, Meck AM, Bartl M, Savino G, Doyle PR, et al. Listening to the Voices: Describing Ethical Caveats of Conversational User Interfaces According to Experts and Frequent Users. Proc 2024 CHI Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst. 2024;1–18. doi:10.1145/3613904.3642542
13. Paré G, Kitsiou S. Methods for literature reviews. In: Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. University of Victoria; 2017.
14. Zarei A, Feiz D, Moradi H. Promoting consumer loyalty and resilience to negative information through brand identity sub-components: an empirical investigation in the luxury electronics goods. J Islam Mark. 2020. doi:10.1108/jima-02-2020-0056
15. Ukgoda H. The Dark Side of Social Media: Analysing Dark Pattern Combinations and Their Impacts. IJIE Indones J Inform Educ. 2024;8(2):101. doi:10.20961/ijie.v8i2.91666
16. Pérez EA. Unethical Design in TikTok and Its Connection to Surveillance Capitalism and Collective Intelligence. In: Data-Driven Governance Through AI, Digital Marketing, and the Privacy Interplay. IGI Global Scientific Publishing; 2025. p. 135–64.
17. Ye X. Dark patterns and addictive designs. Weizenbaum J Digit Soc. 2025;5(3).
18. Mildner T, Savino GL. Ethical User Interfaces: Exploring the Effects of Dark Patterns on Facebook. Hum Factors Comput Syst. 2021. doi:10.1145/3411763.3451659
19. Chromik M, Eiband M, Völkel ST, Buschek D. Dark Patterns of Explainability, Transparency, and User Control for Intelligent Systems. In: Vol. 2327. 2019.
20. Deligöz K. Consumer manipulation with artificial intelligence: Dark patterns and hidden techniques. In: Consumer, Marketing, AI: Dark Sides and Ethics, March. 2025.
21. Polyzos D, Koliatsas I. Digital ethics: the dark side of social media algorithms. Open Sch J Open Sci. 2025;8(2). doi:10.12681/osj.43793
22. Yazici T. Artificial Intelligence Ethics in Communication: Challenges and Future Perspectives. Navig Mod Digit Commun Ethics Law. 2026;33–74.
23. Rahman P, Adaji I. Ethics in persuasive technologies: a systematic literature review. In. 2024. p. 106–18.
24. Shilton K. This is an intervention: Foregrounding and operationalizing ethics during technology design. In: Emerging Pervasive Information and Communication Technologies (PICT) Ethical Challenges, Opportunities and Safeguards. Springer; 2013. p. 177–92.
25. Ansgar K, Perez VE, Helena W, Menisha P, Sofia C, Marina J, et al. Editorial responsibilities arising from personalization algorithms. ORBIT J. 2017;1(1):1–12.
26. Seceleanu A, Garabet BI, Sunda I. Digital Communication in the Age of TikTok: Ethical, Psychological, and Socio-Political Dimensions. In: Navigating Modern Digital Communication Ethics and Law. IGI Global Scientific Publishing; 2026. p. 125–82.
27. Ou M, Zheng H, Li B, Luo C. The Dark Side of Algorithms: How Ethical and Privacy Considerations Affect Individuals’ Engagement With Health Information on Social Media? Int J Commun. 2026;20:24–24.
28. Johar SS, Husaini NA, Kamil NAM, Heng FL, Zaidi NDIM, Hoong LP, et al. Ethical and Civilizational Perspectives on Digital Technology and Social Value: A Conceptual Review. Indones J Community Serv. 2025;4(2):96–103.
29. Sari H, Nurhayati AN, Sulaeman S, Pajarianto H, Asrifan A. Language and Digital Rights. Adv Comput Intell Robot Book Ser. 2025;309–38. doi:10.4018/979-8-3373-5781-2.ch012
30. Afif ZA, Viery A, Yuliana ME. Etika Teknologi Informasi dalam Komunikasi Digital: Pilar Moral di Era Siber. In. 2025. p. 1306–11.
31. Beattie A, Lacey C, Caudwell C. “It’s like the Wild West”: User Experience (UX) Designers on Ethics and Privacy in Aotearoa New Zealand. Des Cult. 2024;16(1):63–82.
32. Fansher M, Chivukula SS, Gray CM. # darkpatterns: Ux practitioner conversations about ethical design. In. 2018. p. 1–6.
33. Maris E, Wagman KB, Bergmann R, Bragg D. Tech worker perspectives on considering the interpersonal implications of communication technologies. Proc ACM Hum-Comput Interact. 2023;7(GROUP):1–22.
34. Pollach I. A typology of communicative strategies in online privacy policies: Ethics, power and informed consent. J Bus Ethics. 2005;62(3):221–35.
35. Monahan T. Built to lie: Investigating technologies of deception, surveillance, and control. Inf Soc. 2016;32(4):229–40.
36. Paveau MA. Éthique du discours numérique. Línguas E Instrum Linguísticos Brés. 2016;37:177–210.
37. Lin J, Chen C. The epistemic ethical concerns involving algorithms in intelligent communication. Teknokultura Rev Cult Digit Mov Soc. 2023;20(2023):27–36.
38. Gray CM, Chivukula SS, Lee A. What Kind of Work Do” Asshole Designers” Create? Describing Properties of Ethical Concern on Reddit. In. 2020. p. 61–73.
39. Gray CM, Kou Y, Battles B, Hoggatt J, Toombs AL. The dark (patterns) side of UX design. In. 2018. p. 1–14.
40. Rahman P, Adaji I. Evaluating user perceptions of trust in persuasive technology: A comparative study. In. 2025. p. 122–30.
41. Serrano-Tellería A. INNOVATIONS IN MOBILE INTERFACE DESIGN: AFFORDANCES AND RISKS. El Prof Inf. 2017;26(2).
42. Lee KS, Wei H. Design factors of ethics and responsibility in social media: A systematic review of literature and expert review of guiding principles. J Media Ethics. 2022;37(3):156–78.
43. Nourian L, Naikar VH, Shinohara K, Tigwell GW. Investigating the Intersection of Cultural Design Preferences and Web Accessibility Guidelines with Designers from the Global South. In: Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems [Internet]. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery; 2025. (CHI ’25). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3714326 doi:10.1145/3706598.3714326
44. Muharam H. The Ethics of Persuasion: Cognitive Bias and Platform Design in Emerging E Commerce Markets. Moneta J Econ Finance. 2024;2(1):37–54.
45. Wang M, Zhao Z. A Cultural-Centered Model Based on User Experience and Learning Preferences of Online Teaching Platforms for Chinese National University Students: Taking Teaching Platforms of WeCom, VooV Meeting, and DingTalk as Examples. Systems. 2022;10(6):216. doi:10.3390/systems10060216
46. Amouzadeh E, Dianat I, Faradmal J, Babamiri M. Optimizing mobile app design for older adults: systematic review of age-friendly design. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2025 Aug 14;37(1):248. doi:10.1007/s40520-025-03157-7 PubMed PMID: 40804492; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC12350549.