Design has evolved dramatically over the years. While traditional design placed aesthetics at the forefront, modern design focuses more on usability and interaction. This shift reflects the growing influence of technology in our lives and the changing goals of designers — who now aim not only to make products visually appealing but also to boost user engagement and retention through strategic UX design.
In this article, I want to shed light on a crucial but often overlooked aspect of UX design: psychological manipulation. The rise of dark patterns reveals the ethical dilemmas that designers and companies face today. These manipulative tactics show how user experiences are often engineered to extract value from users — sometimes leading them to make decisions that are not in their best interests, such as overspending or unknowingly compromising their data privacy.
Types of Deceptive UX Patterns
-
Confirm-Shaming: This tactic uses guilt to manipulate users into staying subscribed or continuing with a service. Phrases like “No thanks, I prefer to pay full price” are designed to make users feel bad for opting out — undermining their autonomy.
-
Misdirection by Design: By placing key information in less prominent areas or using visual hierarchy to guide user attention away from important details, companies can nudge users into unintended actions. This undermines transparency and erodes trust.
-
Trick Questions and User Confusion: Cleverly worded prompts often mislead users into agreeing to terms they don’t fully understand. This lack of clarity compromises informed consent and disrespects user agency.
-
Threats to Data Privacy (Privacy Zuckering): Many users unknowingly consent to sharing sensitive data due to vague language or hidden checkboxes. This practice raises serious concerns about how data is handled and the need for stricter regulation and user education.
My Experience with LottieFiles
While exploring tools for creating animations, I came across LottieFiles, a platform promoted as a free and easy-to-use animation tool. It integrates well with Figma, and I was excited to use it for a project. After creating an illustration, I signed up and began working through the plugin within Figma.
However, for advanced features, I was redirected to the Lottie Editor — a separate tool under LottieFiles. That’s where the user experience took a deceptive turn.
Although LottieFiles is promoted as a free platform, my experience revealed otherwise.
After completing my animation, I clicked the “Save” button. However, I received no toast notification or message indicating where the file was saved. Unaware that it had gone to my dashboard, I assumed everything was fine and tried saving it multiple times.
A few days later, while working on a second animation, a pop-up appeared informing me that I had used up my file limit and needed to upgrade to a Pro Plan.
However I got confused because I created only one animation. When I checked my dashboard, I got to know that there has been multiple files created of same animation as I clicked the save button while editing.
While I understand and accept that some features are reserved for premium users — a common industry practice — most platforms provide clear prior warnings or notifications (e.g., “This is your last free file”) before hitting a limit. In LottieFiles, that transparency was missing.
This experience highlights a subtle but impactful deceptive UX pattern — users are led to believe they are operating within the platform’s free limits, only to be surprised later. Such tactics, unfortunately, are becoming more common as companies seek to increase revenue.
Solution
To create a fair and trustworthy user experience, especially in tools like LottieFiles, transparency must be built into the core interaction flows — particularly where limits and access restrictions apply.
One major improvement would be to implement version control within the same file. Every time a user clicks the “Save” button, the animation could be saved as a new version under the same file, rather than creating a separate entry that consumes from the user’s limited quota. This approach ensures that users can continue editing and refining their work without being penalized for each iteration — a common process in any creative workflow.
Moreover, clear communication is key. If the platform imposes a cap on the number of files a user can create under the free plan, that information should be surfaced in the user journey at the right moments — not hidden in fine print or revealed only at the point of failure.
Future Outlook
Platforms like LottieFiles have an opportunity to lead by example — demonstrating that ethical UX design can coexist with sustainable business models. By prioritizing transparency, respecting user autonomy, and avoiding manipulative patterns, companies can build lasting trust and loyalty among their users.
Designers and product teams must remain vigilant against the temptation to use dark patterns for short-term gains. The long-term cost — eroded trust, user churn, and reputational damage — far outweighs any immediate benefit.
As users become more aware of these tactics, the demand for honest, user-centred design will only grow. The future of UX lies not in manipulation, but in empowerment.