Chen et al. demonstrate clear evidence that persuasive design contributes to problematic smartphone use: certain features “were perceived as affecting attitudes and behaviors” and cultivating dependency. (2)
At the basis of all, developers must recognize that:
Design choices have psychological consequences.
Persuasive features can unintentionally encourage addiction.
Ethical concerns arise when user autonomy erodes.
Moving on, some of the mental health impacts of those persuasive features are:
Depression and anxiety
Social withdrawal
Cognitive overload
Sleep deprivation
One of the ways this manifests in the real world is staying up late just to scroll because you didn’t feel like you did anything satisfying during the day,just to leave you exhausted and foggy the next morning.
Montag et al. highlight research linking problematic use to mood disorders and anxiety, noting that “associations between anxiety disorder, depression, and problematic use have been observed” (1)
Chen et al. remind designers that persuasive technology often “influences users beyond the point of self-control,” raising ethical questions about coercion and transparency. (2)
Alter underscores this dilemma with insights from designers themselves. Many avoid their own products because they recognize their addictive potency: “they discovered they were designing irresistible technologies”. (3)
Regulatory policies on the rise in numerous parts of the world include:
Restrictions on dark patterns
Mandatory transparency of recommendation algorithms
Limits on persuasive features for minors
Data-protection policies that weaken surveillance-based business models
In the same spirit of regulatory practices, Montag et al. call for examining “the prevailing business model of ‘user data in exchange for app-use allowance’” and propose “regulat[ing] certain design elements” to reduce harmful usage patterns. (1)
Unregulated addictive design contributes to:
Productivity loss
Deterioration of collective attention
Increased isolation
Long-term public health costs
Developers should take not of these cascading effects not only for ethical self-assessment but to anticipate regulatory, reputational, and social consequences of maintaining harmful design patterns.