Regulating Deceptive Design: A Comparative Analysis of U.S. and EU Laws on Dark Patterns

With the expansion of digital interactions, users are increasingly subject to dark patterns—interface designs intended to manipulate decision-making. Regulatory responses from the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) aim to mitigate these practices, yet protections remain inconsistent across jurisdictions. Despite growing concern, there is limited research comparing how EU and US regulations approach dark patterns. This paper conducts a thematic analysis and word frequency test of relevant regulations, finding that EU frameworks insufficiently address specific technological risks and lack extended safeguards for vulnerable groups. In contrast, US regulations fall short in governing gatekeepers’ use of manipulative designs and lack robust oversight of artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The paper concludes with recommendations, including expanding protections for vulnerable users in the EU and strengthening gatekeeper and AI-related provisions in the US.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa)
Published
2025-12-23
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Regulating Deceptive Design: A Comparative Analysis of U.S. and EU Laws on Dark Patterns

Joshua Sutton, Sang-Hwa Oh, Ece Gumusel, Justin Chen et al.
ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Regulating Deceptive Design: A Comparative Analysis of U.S. and EU Laws on Dark Patterns

Joshua Sutton, Sang-Hwa Oh, Ece Gumusel, Justin Chen, Kyrie Zhixuan Zhou
article en

Abstract

With the expansion of digital interactions, users are increasingly subject to dark patterns—interface designs intended to manipulate decision-making. Regulatory responses from the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) aim to mitigate these practices, yet protections remain inconsistent across jurisdictions. Despite growing concern, there is limited research comparing how EU and US regulations approach dark patterns. This paper conducts a thematic analysis and word frequency test of relevant regulations, finding that EU frameworks insufficiently address specific technological risks and lack extended safeguards for vulnerable groups. In contrast, US regulations fall short in governing gatekeepers’ use of manipulative designs and lack robust oversight of artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The paper concludes with recommendations, including expanding protections for vulnerable users in the EU and strengthening gatekeeper and AI-related provisions in the US.

ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.