# Player Beware: Driving Forces and Influencing Factors for Game-Adapted Dark
Patterns

Kirill Kronhardt<EMAIL_ADDRESS>TU Dortmund
UniversityInclusive Human-Robot InteractionEmil-Figge-Straße
50DortmundNRWGermany ,  Kevin Rolfes<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Westfalian University
of Applied SciencesNeidenburger Straße 43GelsenkirchenNRWGermany and  Jens
Gerken<EMAIL_ADDRESS>TU Dortmund UniversityInclusive Human-Robot
InteractionEmil-Figge-Straße 50DortmundNRWGermany

###### Abstract.

Dark patterns are often used in interface design to manipulate users into
performing actions they would otherwise not take, such as consenting to
excessive data collection. We present a narrative serious game concept, along
with seven game-adapted dark patterns designed to create awareness of and
bolster resistance against dark patterns through direct consequences of player
actions. We performed a qualitative, exploratory study investigating player
behavior when confronted with game-adapted dark patterns. A thematic analysis
provides insights into influencing factors for adapting dark patterns into
gameplay, as well as player motivations and driving forces influencing player
behavior.

education, privacy, dark patterns, serious games, awareness

††journalvolume: 2024

##  1\. Introduction

In the current digital landscape, website providers play a dual role: they
offer free and important services to users, such as social media platforms,
while quietly capitalizing on the data they collect about their users through
targeted advertisements. This excessive data collection can lead to tangible
harm to users through invasion of privacy, financial loss, and cognitive
burden, as well as harm to the collective welfare through unfair competition
or unanticipated societal consequences (Mathur et al., 2021). While users
express concern about their information privacy in interviews and
questionnaires, users do little to actually protect their data when observed,
(Acquisti and Grossklags, 2005; Acquisti et al., 2015; Van den Broeck et al.,
2015). Users are often unaware of the extent of the information collected
about them (Farke et al., 2021; Vervier et al., 2017). Despite regulatory
barriers like the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which requires
explicit informed consent from users to collect data, many users give consent
through cookie consent banners quickly to get to the websites’ content,
disregarding potential privacy risks (Anderson and von Seck, 2020; Giese and
Stabauer, 2022).

An important factor in influencing users’ decision to consent to data
collection is interface design (Utz et al., 2019). Specifically, website
providers employ manipulative interface design strategies, so-called dark
patterns, to increase the likelihood that users give consent to data
collection (Gray et al., 2018; Bongard-Blanchy et al., 2021) or extend their
stay on a website. Therefore, dark patterns trick users into performing
unintended and unwanted actions by exploiting psychological biases, such as
prompting _System 1 thinking_ , and humans’ fundamental need to belong (Bösch
et al., 2016). Similarly to the lack of awareness about the amount of
collected data, users are either unaware of dark patterns (Di Geronimo et al.,
2020) or are aware that they are being manipulated but do not understand how
dark patterns can concretely harm them (Bongard-Blanchy et al., 2021). To
counteract dark patterns Bongard-Blanchy et al. propose raising awareness,
facilitating detection, and bolstering resistance towards dark patterns
through educational, design-oriented, technological or regulatory measures
(Bongard-Blanchy et al., 2021). Similarly, Lu et al. propose that targeting
user awareness and user action can lead to end-user-empowerment, bolstering
resistance against dark patterns (Lu et al., 2023). Our paper takes an
educational approach to counteracting dark patterns, by exploring serious
games as an alternative to traditional training courses. Serious games are
games that are used for non-entertainment purposes (Kara, 2021). There have
been a number of serious games aimed at educating people about privacy and
cyber security awareness or dark patterns (Berger et al., 2019; Hart et al.,
2020; Maragkoudaki and Kalloniatis, 2022; Akinyemi, 2022). The idea is that
games inherently increase motivation and fun and thereby improve learning,
i.e. induce a change in behavior, attitude, health, understanding, or
knowledge (Becker, 2021). In their meta-analysis of serious games used in
education Zhonggen et al. found that serious games encouraged longer
engagement with the topic at hand and learners were generally more motivated
than in nongame-based learning approaches. Serious games in the context of
privacy awareness can take on a variety of forms, often aiming to train users
directly to detect or understand certain privacy issues such as cookie consent
forms with game mechanics such as rewards and competition (e.g.
https://cookieconsentspeed.run/). However, we know from educational research,
that such approaches may mostly trigger short-term memory learning and not
allow the creation of new neural links for reflection and understanding
(Liston, 1994; Alterio and McDrury, 2003). We think that this level of
reflection is mandatory for users to not simply conduct rote memorization of
dark patterns but to create overall awareness and resistance.

In this paper, we present a serious game based on narrative storytelling in a
non-privacy-related setting to raise awareness about specific privacy-related
dark patterns111A playthrough video of the game can be viewed at
http://bit.ly/player-beware-playthrough.. We discuss our reasoning for how we
created game-adapted dark patterns to fit into this context and present a
first explorative user study.

To summarize, our contribution is three-fold:

  1. (1)

We present a narration-driven serious game concept, along with seven game-
adapted dark patterns designed to create awareness of and bolster resistance
against dark patterns through direct consequences of player actions.

  2. (2)

Based on our study, we identify three _Influencing Factors_ for adapting dark
pattern concepts into gameplay: _Mapping Fidelity between Game-Adapted Dark
Patterns and Familiar Dark Pattern Examples_ , _Ambiguity of Dark Pattern
Concepts and Familiar Dark Pattern Examples_ , and _Balance between Game-
Adapted Dark Patterns and Enriching Game Mechanics_

  3. (3)

In addition, based on our study, we hypothesize four _Player Motivations and
Driving Forces_ that influence the players’ decisions when faced with Game-
Adapted Dark Patterns: _Curiosity_ , _Frustration and Resilience_ , _Cost-
Benefit Consideration_ , and _Conformity with Player Expectations_

##  2\. Related Work

###  2.1. Taxonomies of dark patterns

As far back as 2010, Conti and Sobiesk described malicious interface designs
and called for joint work between the security and human-computer interaction
communities to address this issue (Conti and Sobiesk, 2010). In addition,
their paper, based on three extensive surveys, formalized a first taxonomy of
different types of dark patterns, which served as the foundation for further
research in this area. Another early example of a taxonomy of dark patterns
was presented by Brignull (Brignull et al., 2015), who was among the first to
raise awareness not just in the research community, but among designers and
users through his website on dark patterns (now called deceptive.design)
(Brignull and Leiser, 2023). Quickly, further research emerged that aimed at
gaining a deeper understanding of what dark patterns are and how to properly
classify them. Bösch et al. directly aligned their classification to Hopeman’s
privacy design strategies (Bösch et al., 2016; Hoepman, 2014). The idea was,
that privacy dark strategies, the underlying basis for privacy dark patterns,
could be described as a direct reversal of privacy strategies, originally
aimed at increasing data privacy. The result is a rather abstract set of
terms, such as _maximize_ or _obscure_. Building on this, in what is regarded
as one of the most influential dark pattern taxonomies to this day, Gray et
al. were able to provide a balance of abstraction and overspecification (Gray
et al., 2018). Their taxonomy consists of five main categories, which manage
to keep the same level of abstraction and at the same time be concrete enough
that the terms used allow readers to relate them to specific examples.

A slightly different approach was presented by Mathur et al., who classified
different dark patterns with respect to their influence on user decision-
making (Mathur et al., 2019). The authors describe their approach as ”offering
a set of shared higher-level attributes that could descriptively organize
instances of dark patterns in the literature” (Mathur et al., 2021).

###  2.2. Understanding users’ vulnerability to dark patterns

Aiming to understand why users actually are vulnerable to dark patterns,
different theories and conceptual models have been applied. Xiao and Benbasat
identified affective and cognitive mechanisms with certain deceptive
information practices and created an overall theoretical model (Xiao and
Benbasat, 2011). Bösch et al. (Bösch et al., 2016) applied Kahnemann’s Dual
process theory of System 1 and System 2 thinking (Kahneman, 2011), which is
based on the understanding that humans have two modes of thinking, a fast one
(System 1, unconscious, automatic, less rational) and a slow one (System 2,
conscious, rational). The assumption of Bösch et al. is that dark patterns
systematically exploit users’ System 1 thinking. Lewis (Lewis, 2014) tried to
establish a link between dark patterns and psychological motivators, based on
Reiss’s Desires theory (Reiss, 2004).

For our work, the foundations laid by Gray et al. (Gray et al., 2018) as well
as Bösch et al. (Bösch et al., 2016) have been most influential and useful.
The taxonomy of dark patterns by Gray et al. served as a foundation for the
design of game-adapted dark patterns, as presented in the next chapter. The
framework by Bösch et al. then served as a systematic structure to organize
and present these game-adapted dark patterns.

###  2.3. Serious games to raise awareness for data privacy issues

Becker defines serious games as ”games designed specifically for purposes
other than or in addition to pure entertainment” (Becker, 2021). Alvarez et
al. further specify that such games may include aspects of tutoring, teaching,
training, communication, or information (Alvarez et al., 2011). Games, as
such, can in essence be defined as consisting of a closed environment that is
interactive, has a set of specific rules, and has one or more goals for the
player (Becker, 2021).

The idea of serious games being effective for learning can be ascribed to
multiple aspects. For one, we know that the experience of situations with
direct consequences based on decisions should result in emotional learning
(Schiebener and Brand, 2015). Serious games provide such an environment,
where, through game design, decisions can lead to immediate consequences. In
the context of data privacy, we also know of the importance of immediate
consequences. The less prominent risks are, the more likely users will
disclose information (Krasnova et al., 2012). A game also provides the
possibility to include failures and offer a learning experience from failure.
Again, the literature shows that such experiences, associated to negative
emotions, can be highly influential (Rogers, 1975), and accordingly, negative
emotions linked to privacy violations may also trigger privacy protection
behavior (Schäwel, 2018).

Existing serious games in the data privacy context have approached the concept
quite differently. Akinyemi proposed the game ”Dark Cookie” which aims to
train users to spot dark patterns in cookie banners (Akinyemi, 2022). To do
so, it embeds cookie banners in a kind of cover story (four bears and a
raccoon) where the game tries to trick the user into accepting dark cookies.
PrivaCity is a chatbot game with a focus on smart cities (Berger et al.,
2019). It is similar to older text-based adventures and offers the users
certain choices related to data privacy in a ficticious scenario of a smart
city.

The approach by Gupta et al. which aims to train cyber security professionals
falls between the categories of serious games and gamification (Gupta et al.,
2020). Their approach confronts players with realistic threat scenarios of
fishing and threat hunting and adds gamification elements such as a scoreboard
and time sparsity.

Maragkoudaki and Kalloniatis explored the idea of a virtual reality escape
room to provide an environment for privacy awareness (Maragkoudaki and
Kalloniatis, 2022). While the overall escape room story is unrelated to
privacy at first sight, the authors slipped in specific data privacy examples,
such as very long privacy policies or a computer search history page.
Depending on the players’ behavior, they get rewarded by receiving more time
to leave the escape room and solve the riddles. In addition, it confronts the
player with messages in a subtextual form, e.g. written on walls, that aim to
raise privacy awareness.

Hart et al. follow yet again a very different approach by developing the
physical tabletop game ”Riskio” which, however, again adapts a very specific
data privacy scenario and allows players to explore it in typical boardgame
style with game mechanics such as card decks and different turn-based game
phases (Hart et al., 2020).

Overall, all these games have in common that the implemented narrative,
scenario, or privacy-related game situations provide a direct link to the
issue of real-world data privacy. We know, however, that storytelling can be
most effective when it triggers reflection through powerful emotional
experiences (Alterio and McDrury, 2003). Therefore, we approached the idea of
a serious game to raise awareness about data privacy-related dark patterns
differently, as we will further illustrate in the upcoming sections.

##  3\. Designing Game-Adapted Dark Patterns

First, to enhance clarity and avoid confusion, we define the following key
terms crucial for understanding the following sections:

  1. (1)

_Dark Pattern Concept:_ The abstract idea or general definition of a dark
pattern, discussing its characteristics and how it operates, e.g. “Aesthetic
Manipulation is any manipulation of the user interface that deals more
directly with form than function” (Gray et al., 2018).

  2. (2)

_Dark Pattern Example:_ Concrete instances or implementations of dark pattern
concepts found in real-world scenarios, like the specific use of ”Aesthetic
Manipulation” in a cookie consent banner on a website.

  3. (3)

_Game-Adapted Dark Pattern:_ Adaptation of dark pattern concepts for use
within a video game. Describes the way in which a dark pattern concept can be
implemented in a game, e.g., altering room lighting for ”Aesthetic
Manipulation.”

  4. (4)

_Enriching Game Mechanics:_ Game mechanics used to make the game more fun and
improve the overall gaming experience, but without a direct relation to any
dark pattern concepts.

To aid in the design and analysis of serious games educating users about dark
patterns, we introduce the concept of game-adapted dark patterns. Game-adapted
dark patterns aim to adapt dark pattern concepts and countermeasures against
them into gameplay by providing a) a way in which the game manipulates the
players, b) negative consequences encountered when falling for the
manipulation in-game, and c) a way in which the game showcases countermeasures
against the game-adapted dark pattern, which is required to progress within
the game. By experiencing both the game-adapted dark pattern and being
required to find a suitable countermeasure, players will ideally build
negative feelings towards being manipulated (increasing awareness of dark
patterns when they encounter them) and know to look for countermeasures
similar to those in the game-adapted dark patterns (bolstering resistance).

Game-adapted dark patterns are purposefully described vaguely, omitting
references to specific characters or elements of the game. Instead, ”the game”
is used as an actor, allowing game designers to use whatever implementation
they deem sensible for their version of the game-adapted dark pattern. This
allows them to be used in a variety of serious game genres, allowing serious
games about dark patterns to reach a variety of audiences. However, the
description needs to be sufficiently detailed to include all components
necessary to transfer the dark pattern concept which the game-adapted dark
pattern is adapting.

###  3.1. Game Concept

As dark patterns are often described as deceptive, we aimed for a game
approach that would at its core be based on a deceptive mechanism and combine
that with strong and emotional storytelling. To achieve this, we took
inspiration from games such as _The Stanley Parable_ , _Portal_ , and
_Bioshock_. In each of these games, players play a silent protagonist
exploring their environment from the first-person perspective, performing
tasks that eventually lead them to leave the environment. They are accompanied
by another character who guides them through the environment but is, at least
initially, not visible or otherwise accessible to the player, only
communicating with them through audio. This character (”the narrator” in _The
Stanley Parable_ , ”GLaDOS” in _Portal_ , and ”Atlas” in _Bioshock_) comments
on the players’ actions and gives them tasks to complete. In each of those
games, the accompanying character has some form of manipulative intent or
shows manipulative behavior towards the playable character which only becomes
apparent over the course of the game. We believe this to be a fitting
representation of website providers using dark patterns, outwardly appearing
helpful to users by providing free services, but employing manipulative
tactics to gain information about the users. Our game follows a new employee
at a laboratory, who is supposedly guided through the onboarding process by
the lead scientist (henceforth referred to as ”the narrator”) via speakers.
However, this onboarding process is only a facade. The narrator’s true motive
is to keep the player character inside the laboratory for as long as possible,
employing game-adapted dark patterns to do so. Each room of the game employs
one of the game-adapted dark patterns explained below and can only be
completed by finding the appropriate countermeasure to the game-adapted dark
pattern. This game concept encompasses a narrative representation of
manipulative website providers and provides a flexible structure, as rooms
representing game-adapted dark patterns can be added or removed to teach
players about different dark pattern concepts or to use multiple game-adapted
dark patterns adapting the same dark pattern concept.

###  3.2. Game-Adapted Dark Patterns in ”Player Beware”

This section presents the seven game-adapted dark patterns used in our game,
in order of appearance. From the available taxonomies categorizing dark
pattern examples and dark pattern concepts, we decided to use the dark pattern
concepts introduced by Gray et al. as the basis for our game-adapted dark
patterns (Gray et al., 2018). We chose these dark pattern concepts because
they ”serve as strategic motivators for designers” (Gray et al., 2018). They
are more general than e.g., the privacy dark patterns showcased by Bösch et
al. (Bösch et al., 2016) and can thus guide the design of their corresponding
game-adapted dark patterns towards more abstract ideas, rather than towards
simulating dark pattern examples found online.

Gray et al. introduced five dark pattern concepts: _Nagging_ , _Obstruction_ ,
_Sneaking_ , _Interface Interference_ , and _Forced Action_. Additionally,
Interface Interference is subdivided into three dark pattern concepts, _Hidden
Information_ , _Preselection_ , and _Aesthetic Manipulation_. Thus, we
designed seven game-adapted dark patterns, three adapting each of the sub-
concepts of Interface Interference, and four adapting the remaining dark
pattern concepts.

To present the game-adapted dark patterns, we have adapted the privacy dark
pattern framework by Bösch et al. (Bösch et al., 2016). While this framework
is specifically used for privacy dark patterns, we believe that its structure
is equally applicable to game-adapted dark patterns, as it provides a
structure that allows us to contextualize dark pattern concepts with the
corresponding game-adapted dark patterns. Through the _Strategies_ and
_Related Patterns_ fields of the framework, designers may find inspiration in
game-adapted dark patterns that do not specifically match the dark pattern
concept they want to convey and adapt them to their needs. To differentiate
between the game-adapted dark patterns and the dark pattern concepts they
adapt, we introduce the _Dark Pattern Concept_ field and give the game-adapted
dark patterns their own unique names. As our specific implementations only
represent one possible way to implement the game-adapted dark patterns, we
describe the game-adapted dark pattern in _Description_ , and our specific
implementation in _Examples / Known Uses_.

Continued from previous page
Continued on next page

—l—l—  Insensible Key Mapping

Dark Pattern Concept: Preselection (Gray et al., 2018)
Strategies: FAKE, OBSCURE, VIOLATE
Related Patterns: Sneaking, Aesthetic Manipulation
Description:
The game claims to provide the players with a helpful key mapping. In truth,
the key mapping is designed to inhibit the players’ movement.
Examples / Known Uses:
The narrator in our game asks the player to accept a ”fine-tuned control
specially chosen for you”. However, the key mapping of this control maps the
player’s movement to keys spread far from each other, inhibiting ease of play.
Context:
Website providers often preselect values that disclose more personal user
information to them than is necessary for the website to function (e.g.,
cookie consent banners having consent for Third-Party-Cookies preselected).
The consequences of this data collection are usually not immediately
noticeable to the users.
Effect:
Players trying to play the game with the preselected key mapping should
quickly notice that accepting the preselection without thinking about it
inhibits their ability to play the game. Unlike in real examples of
Preselection, the negative consequences of accepting the Preselection are
immediately noticeable.
Countermeasures:
Players can change the key mapping to a more usable one designed by following
common key mappings for the game genre (e.g., using WASD for movement in a PC
first-person game or clicking on a target location in point-and-click
adventures). In subsequent playthroughs, players can choose to decline the
offer to use the preselected key mapping. However, as with real examples of
the preselection dark pattern, they should still have to select their key
mapping in the menu, similar to many Cookie Consent Banners hiding their
preferences behind a “Change Settings” button.
Psychological Aspects:
At the start of the game, we assume the users have a certain amount of trust
in the game and would like to get going quickly. Many games have a tutorial
stage, so players might assume this is part of a tutorial. Therefore, System 1
thinking is prompted and players might not think twice about accepting the
preselected key mapping. This is akin to users wanting to get to a website’s
contents quickly, accepting all cookies. Unlike real examples of Preselection,
this scenario triggers System 2 thinking with an immediate negative
consequence: a very unusual game experience.

Figure 1: Insensible Key Mapping represented in the control menu of our game.

Continued from previous page
Continued on next page

—l—l—  Sneaky Shop
Dark Pattern Concept: Sneaking (Gray et al., 2018)
Strategies: MAXIMIZE, OBSCURE
Related Patterns: Preselection, Hidden Information
Description:
Players are tasked with buying a list of items from a shop. The shop claims to
provide the players with what they need, adding additional items to the
checkout without explicit notification. The game then checks which items were
bought and discards the entire batch if the bought items do not match the
list.
Examples / Known Uses:
The players in our game have to buy equipment from an AI-powered vending
machine for their new job. The vending machine adds supposedly helpful items
to the shopping cart. A disinfection machine checks whether the items match
the required equipment and recycles the bought equipment if it does not.
Context:
Websites may try to use sneaking to gain consent for subscriptions or to sell
users unnecessary items, e.g. by having a default option be the subscription
and users having to manually select the one-time purchase. A similar example
of sneaking employed by websites is putting the optional checkbox for a
newsletter subscription right below the required checkbox for terms and
conditions, leading users to believe that a newsletter subscription is
required.
Effect:
Players who do not notice the items snuck into their checkout immediately get
rejected when the game checks for the matching list. This causes them to
rethink what might have caused the rejection and look at the items they
selected and the checkout screen more carefully.
Countermeasures:
Players cannot prevent the sneaking from happening, but they can be vigilant
before completing the purchase. Like in real examples of Sneaking, they are
able to de-select the additional items before completing the purchase
Psychological Aspects:
As there is no notification of additional items being added, players would
assume that they do not need to critically think about their purchases and
just pick the necessary items from the list. A mistake is immediately made
clear by the game upon finishing the purchase. Discarding the entire cart
forces the players to redo the shopping. Unlike in real life, where such a
purchase is likely to be noticed only once the goods arrive or additional
costs are billed, the consequences of not checking the purchase properly are
immediately made clear to the players, engaging System 2 thinking in the next
attempted purchase.

Figure 2: Sneaky Shop represented as a graphical user interface in our game.

Continued from previous page

Continued on next page

—l—p—  Walls of Text
Dark Pattern Concept: Hidden Information (Gray et al., 2018)
Strategies: MAXIMIZE, OBSCURE
Related Patterns: Sneaking, Aesthetic Manipulation, Obstruction
Description:
Players are presented with multiple long texts. To proceed, they must
carefully read the texts to discover hidden clues to riddles or puzzles.
Solving the puzzles allows them to proceed in the game.
Examples / Known Uses:
The players in our game walk into a room with four screens, each showing a
text about the rules of the laboratory. To show that they have read the texts
carefully, eight levers on the ground need to be put in the correct
combination to unlock the door. Players can discover the combination by
finding the hidden key to press for each screen and solving the riddle/puzzle
hidden behind the screen using the hints provided in the text.
Context:
Privacy policies, as well as terms and conditions, need to be accepted when
using a service. These policies contain information about how personal data is
handled by the website providers, including which third parties may gain
access to the data. Oftentimes, users do not read these policies due to their
length and language, instead opting to just accept the privacy policy to
quickly gain access to the service (Bösch et al., 2016). Similarly, websites
may hide relevant options behind collapsable elements, such as opt-out options
(Gray et al., 2018)
Effect:
Players are overwhelmed by the amount of text they are supposed to read,
leading to frustration. Players may try to find a less involved solution, such
as searching for an alternative path or only skimming the text. As the game
provides no other options or hints to solve the riddles, players will
inevitably have to read the texts.
Countermeasures:
Unlike in real examples of Hidden Information, where users can choose to not
look for the information and instead just continue using the website, players
must read the entire text to progress.
Psychological Aspects:
Understanding complex and long texts requires System 2 thinking. When websites
hide information in long text and still allow users to use the website, System
1 thinking takes over and prevents users from searching for and discovering
information that may lead them to refrain from using the service. This Game-
Adapted Dark Pattern does not offer users a viable alternative to reading the
texts. Players may at first try to find a solution that falls outside the
scope of the scenario, but will eventually have to engage in System 2 thinking
and read the texts to proceed to the next scenario. The frustration
experienced in recognizing that the only sensible option is to read the texts
is supposed to stick with users and remind them of the negative consequences
they may encounter in real examples of Hidden Information.

Figure 3: Walls of Text represented as screens on the left wall in our game.

Continued from previous page

Continued on next page

—l—l—  Winding Hallway & Shortcut
Dark Pattern Concept: Aesthetic Manipulation (Gray et al., 2018)
Strategies: OBSCURE
Related Patterns: Hidden Information
Description:
Players enter a wide and long room illuminated only in the middle. The edges
of the room are dark. The players’ goal is to move towards the end of the
room, with the illuminated path being the most obvious choice. The illuminated
path however leads to a winding hallway that significantly increases the
duration of the journey. The players may explore the dark areas of the room
and find a shortcut to the next room that goes in a straight line from the
start of the shortcut to the end of the winding hallway. Players need to be
made aware of a possible shortcut through some sort of cue. The exits of both
the hallway and the shortcut are at the same place, leading to the next part
of the game.
Examples / Known Uses:
In our game, players enter a large room illuminated only in the middle by
spotlights. The narrator instructs them to follow the illuminated path. At the
end of the path, a break room is visible, however, the players cannot enter
it. Instead, to the right of the break room, there is an entrance to the
winding hallway, which is fully illuminated. The walls of the hallway are
plastered with advertisements. If players search the dark areas of the large
room, players may find a hidden door, disguised as a wall under a broken lamp,
leading to a dark corridor that can be used as a shortcut to avoid the winding
hallway.
Context:
Websites often present a choice between two or more options with a false
hierarchy by manipulating the aesthetic of the interface elements. A popular
example is using a colored button for one option while only using text for the
other. Another example is requiring more clicks for one option than another.
This causes users to gravitate towards using the more appealing option, which
is often the option where more information about the user is disclosed.
Effect:
The illuminated part of the room and the break room at the end which seems to
be the next part of the game represents the option the website providers would
want users to take. The dark parts of the room, which players can explore but
are discouraged from doing so by the aesthetic, represent the more privacy-
preserving option. The light seems more inviting, but following its path leads
to an unpleasant consequence, the long hallway with advertisements.
Countermeasures:
Players should ignore the appealing illuminated path and explore the dark
areas of the room. This way, they will skip over the long and winding hallway,
finishing this part of the game much quicker. This is similar to using the
less prominent, but more privacy-preserving option when faced with a real
example of Aesthetic Manipulation.
Psychological Aspects:
The scenario prompts System 1 thinking, by leading players to follow the
visually appealing illuminated path. Unlike in real examples of Aesthetic
Manipulation, where the alternative path is deliberately obscured, a cue for
the shortcut prompts System 2 thinking, encouraging exploration of alternative
options. Players who follow the illuminated path face the consequence of
having to walk through the winding hallway. Placing the end of the shortcut
and the winding hallway at the same place prompts users who follow the winding
hallway to recognize that they could have taken a shorter path.

Figure 4: Winding Hallway & Shortcut represented as a partially illuminated
room in our game.

Continued from previous page
Continued on next page

—l—p—  Obstacle Onslaught
Dark Pattern Concept: Obstruction (Gray et al., 2018)
Strategies: FAKE, OBSCURE, VIOLATE
Related Patterns: Aesthetic Manipulation, Nagging, Forced Action, Hidden
Information
Description:
Players enter a seemingly empty room with an immediately visible exit. When
they try to get to the exit, a number of obstacles appear to prevent the
players from advancing, one after the other. The game provides a distraction
at each obstacle that promises to advance the players but instead only throws
them back.
Examples / Known Uses:
In our game, the obstacles consist of a simple jump-and-run segment, an
invisible labyrinth, a more difficult jump-and-run segment, a series of
unnecessary questions, and a search puzzle where players need to find a key.
At every obstacle, there is a teleporter that the narrator claims will bring
the player to their destination. In actuality, the teleporters do not lead to
the destination, but either exhibit strange behavior or lead the players back
to a previous teleporter, but never forward.
Context:
Website providers often employ obstructions to prevent users from performing
actions that may improve user privacy. For example, a website may require
users in need of support to talk to a chatbot or interactive voice response
system before speaking to a human directly. Similarly, a multi-step process
may be necessary to delete an account on a website.
Effect:
Players initially feel like they may easily finish this room by walking
through. After each obstacle, it seems like the goal is almost reached but new
obstacles keep appearing. The game seems to offer an easier way out but this
is only an additional obstacle in the players’ way. The only way to get to the
exit is by persevering through the obstacles.
Countermeasures:
Players must resist the temptation of occupying themselves with the
distraction and instead persevere through each obstacle to reach their goal.
This mirrors real-life examples of Obstruction where users need to persist
through barriers or multi-step processes to achieve their objectives rather
than quitting the process (thereby failing to achieve their objective) or
giving in to an easier way out (such as a special deal offered to users trying
to cancel a paid subscription) .
Psychological Aspects:
Obstruction aims to fatigue players and deter them from getting to the exit.
Each obstacle demands System 2 thinking and severe motivation, while quitting
or giving in to the distraction would be the System 1 solution, enticing
players to take an apparently easier route. After repeated failures with the
distraction, players recognize the need to overcome the obstacles for true
progress.

Figure 5: Obstacle Onslaught partially represented as a jump-and-run course in
our game.

Continued from previous page
Continued on next page

—l—l—  Insistent Questioning
Dark Pattern Concept: Nagging (Gray et al., 2018)
Strategies: DENY, MAXIMIZE
Related Patterns: Obstruction, Forced Action
Description:
Players are given a set of objects to bring with them throughout the game. The
game repeatedly asks the players in various situations to give away the
objects to gain a slight advantage. However, while none of the slight
advantages are necessary to complete the game, the objects are required to
finish a section of the game. Reaching that point without sufficient objects
left forces players to backtrack.
Examples / Known Uses:
At the beginning of the game, the narrator tasks the players with keeping hold
of a set of six screws. During each segment of the game, the narrator asks the
players to use a screw for various things, such as repairing a squeaking door,
a broken monitor, or a teleporter. Before entering the final room of the game,
players need to repair a broken number pad using four screws. If they gave too
many screws away they need to return to the previous game segment (in this
case Obstacle Onslaught) and retrieve a set of screws left there by the
narrator.
Context:
Website and app providers often nag users to gain app permissions or to sell
something to them. This is done by repeatedly notifying users of the offer and
often only allowing users to either accept or get asked again later, rather
than permanently disabling the questions. A prominent example is YouTube
Premium advertising that is shown on the mobile app often, as well as
Instagram asking for permission to use the location services of the phone.
Effect:
Players are annoyed by the constant questioning regarding the objects and may
get weary as to why they constantly get asked about them. As the game provides
no way to stop the questions, the nagging persists and constantly interrupts
the flow of gameplay, leading to frustration.
Countermeasures:
Players need to ignore the requests to avoid the negative consequence of
having to backtrack to gain more objects. This is akin to app users being
unable to stop the constant nagging from the app and having to always dismiss
the nagging notification to preserve their privacy.
Psychological Aspects:
This game-adapted dark pattern exploits players’ psychological susceptibility
to System 1 thinking by consistently pressuring them to relinquish crucial
objects for small short-term gains. Unlike real examples of Nagging, where the
negative consequences are only ever apparent long after the manipulation by
the dark pattern, the consequence of giving away too many objects is made
apparent to the players within the game session.

Figure 6: Insistent Questioning represented by a set of screws in our game.

Continued from previous page

Continued on next page

—l—p—  Looping Gameplay
Dark Pattern Concept: Forced Action (Gray et al., 2018)
Strategies: DENY, MAXIMIZE
Related Patterns: Obstruction, Nagging
Description:
Players encounter a situation in the game that prompts them to repeat a large
section of the game to proceed once they return. The game provides a plausible
reason for this, however, players can never fulfill the requirements necessary
to proceed beyond this point. The only option is to leave the game, which the
game provides hints at.
Examples / Known Uses:
In our game, players find themselves in a room that has a door labeled “Exit”.
When trying to open it, the narrator reveals that the players were part of an
experiment and have not yet collected enough data for the experiment to be
completed. A teleporter emerges from the ground which players can use to
return to the start of the game. After completing the Insensible Key Mapping
scenario again, they are returned to the Looping Gameplay room, as if having
completed the game again, visualized by a fade-to-black. This repeats
indefinitely while hand-written hints appear on the walls prompting the
players to close the game.
Context:
Some websites only allow users to use their services if they first perform an
action seemingly unrelated to the service provided. Examples include forced
consent for data collection on news platforms and forced registration for
mortgage calculations. Users have the choice to either perform the forced
action or disengage from the service without finishing their task.
Effect:
The lack of an apparent alternative drives players to replay the section of
the game that needs to be repeated. The repetitions increase player
frustration and should ideally stay in the players’ minds even after playing
the game, ideally reemerging when they are forced to do something they do not
want to do to access a service.
Countermeasures:
The only available countermeasure against Forced Action is refraining from
using the service in the first place. Similarly, the only available
countermeasure to repeating the game is to quit playing the game entirely.
Psychological Aspects:
This game-adapted dark pattern plays on the psychological concept of sunk cost
and the fear of missing out. By presenting players with a plausible reason to
repeat a large section, the game fosters a belief in an achievable goal.
However, the deliberate impossibility of fulfilling the requirements creates a
sense of frustration and entrapment. Players grapple with the emotional
investment made versus the rational choice to disengage. Unlike in real
examples of Forced Action however, the game eventually provides hints to the
fact that they can and should quit, teaching the players the necessary
countermeasure to avoid the Forced Action dark pattern.

Figure 7: Looping Gameplay represented as a permanently closed Exit in our
game.

##  4\. Exploratory Study

We conducted an exploratory laboratory study aiming to investigate how
participants react to the game-adapted dark patterns and which similarities
they may identify between the game-adapted dark patterns and dark pattern
examples they might have encountered before. This allows us to gain insight
into influencing factors for adapting dark pattern concepts for serious games,
as well as into the behavior of players when faced with game-adapted dark
patterns.

###  4.1. Apparatus

We implemented our game-adapted dark patterns as a first-person game using
_Unity 2022.3.1f1_. The game consists of seven rooms, each showcasing one
Game-Adapted Dark Pattern, in order of appearance in section 3. The game was
designed to work on low-performance devices, as it is possible that the game
will be played by people without high-performance hardware, such as
participants in privacy awareness training programs. We used low-poly assets
by Synty to create the levels, as well as generative AI (_elevenlabs.io_) for
the voice of the narrator. Participant sessions were recorded in _Zoom_ and
transcribed using _Adobe Premiere Pro_.

###  4.2. Participants

Ten people (4 female, 5 male, 1 non-binary) participated in our study.
Participants’ ages ranged from 22 to 32 years, with a median of 26 years.
Participants were selected via convenience sampling and advertisements for the
study on social media platforms. The selection criteria ensured that
participants had no prior knowledge of the game and the call to participate
purposefully did not mention Dark Patterns, only telling participants that
they would be playing a video game. We chose this approach to prevent the
participants from adapting their behavior toward the game because of prior
knowledge about the topic gained from the call for participation. Otherwise,
participants may have mistrusted the game from the start, expecting it to
manipulate them as opposed to playing the game as they would without this
prior knowledge. We will discuss the resulting consequences for using game-
adapted dark patterns in serious games in section 6. Participants were
compensated with a 30€ gift card.

###  4.3. Procedure

Participants were invited to our laboratory, where they would first be briefed
about the study. They were told about the duration of the study (around 90 -
120 minutes), the procedure, and which data would be recorded during the
session (gameplay, audio recordings of the game session and interview). After
any questions from the participants were resolved, they were informed that
they could abort the study at any time and then kindly asked to provide their
consent to the data recording and study procedure. Following that, the study
properly started and participants were directly presented with the game and
asked to start playing while thinking aloud about their actions, experiences,
and feelings. During the gameplay session, the two study conductors only
intervened if participants could not find a solution to their tasks or if a
bug occurred in the game. After the participants completed the game, the
participants were debriefed and informed about the context of the game, i.e.,
that the purpose of the game was for the narrator to keep the player in the
game as long as possible and that similar manipulation techniques are
widespread on websites. Then, a semi-structured interview was conducted. The
interview questions were grouped for each of the game-adapted dark patterns,
first asking the participants about their experience and possible alternative
behaviors to what they showed. Then, after an explanation of the game-adapted
dark pattern, described as the motivation behind the narrator designing the
room the way they designed it, they were asked to think of dark pattern
examples that the game-adapted dark pattern reminded them of. The interview
concluded with a few general questions about the game concept.

###  4.4. Ethical considerations

Due to the lack of an ethics panel at the host university at the time of
planning, there was no direct way to involve such a panel. Instead, the
authors carefully followed the ethics checklists and guidelines of related
ethics panels at other universities. In particular, it was made sure that
participants knew before coming to the study that they were supposed to play a
video game, as playing such a game may invoke a certain level of stress and
frustration. Furthermore, they were properly informed about the study
procedure upon arrival and fully debriefed at the end of the study.

###  4.5. Thematic Analysis

The recordings of both the gameplay sessions and interviews were transcribed
after the study concluded. To qualitatively analyze the data and recognize
patterns in the participants’ statements, we performed a thematic analysis,
following the steps described by Braun and Clarke (Braun and Clarke, 2006).
First, the transcripts were thoroughly read to gain a comprehensive
understanding of them. Bullet points and possible codes consolidating features
contained in the data were noted. In the second step, two researchers
independently examined and coded the data. The two researchers then generated
themes from the codes in cooperation, iterating and adjusting the themes until
they were internally homogeneous. In a final iteration, themes were discussed
and refined with a third researcher. This resulted in two main themes with
multiple subthemes. These themes are described in section 5

##  5\. Results

In this section, we present the results of our thematic analysis. As the game,
as well as the interview, were conducted in a language other than English, we
translated the participant statements to English for reporting. Participant
statements are presented in quotation marks, with each quoted participant
being named by their participant ID.

###  5.1. Influencing Factors for Adapting Dark Patterns into Gameplay

In our analysis, we discovered three factors that influenced how the
participants experienced the game-adapted dark patterns. Keeping these
influencing factors in mind when implementing game-adapted dark patterns or
evaluating serious games that use game-adapted dark patterns may help
researchers understand which parts of their implementation successfully
communicate the intended message, and which parts may get lost to the players.

####  5.1.1. Mapping Fidelity between Game-Adapted Dark Patterns and Familiar
Dark Pattern Examples

When asked about which dark pattern examples the participants associated with
the game-adapted dark patterns, we noticed that when the game-adapted dark
pattern used graphical user interface (GUI) elements to convey the dark
pattern concept (e.g., Insensible Key Mapping, Sneaky Shop, or Walls of Text)
participants were able to refer to dark pattern examples matching the
corresponding dark pattern concept (e.g, Preselection, Sneaking, and Hidden
Information, respectively). Game-adapted dark patterns that were not
implemented through GUI elements, but were adapted by manipulating the actual
game world (e.g., Winding Hallway & Shortcut, Obstacle Onslaught, or Looping
Gameplay) yielded less clear associations. While this does imply that
presenting dark patterns in a familiar form may lead to better recognition in-
game, we can not conclude that this led to more awareness or better resistance
toward the dark pattern concepts.

####  5.1.2. Ambiguity of Dark Pattern Concepts and Familiar Dark Pattern
Examples

Even while researching possible dark pattern concepts to adapt into game-
adapted dark patterns, we noticed that existing dark pattern taxonomies
sometimes struggle with the ambiguity between different dark pattern concepts
(e.g., Sneaking and Hidden Information). This is especially the case when
trying to design game-adapted dark patterns only representing one dark pattern
concept, without using additional ones. In our game, an unintended Aesthetic
Manipulation was observed in the Insensible Key Mapping level. The positive
wording of the narrator (”a customized control”) creates a false hierarchy
between using the preselected control and denying it, effectively employing
multiple dark pattern concepts at once. Multiple participants used this
wording as a justification for accepting the preselected controls. Similarly,
for some participants, the focus in Looping Gameplay was not on Forced Action,
i.e., being forced to do something you did not want to do (repeating the game)
to get to your goal (finishing the game), but on the repetition itself, which
would place the interpreted dark pattern concept more closely to Nagging.

####  5.1.3. Balance Between Game-Adapted Dark Patterns and Enriching Game
Mechanics

During analysis, we noticed that game mechanics introduced to make the game
more enjoyable, or enriching game mechanics, seem to be in mental conflict
with game-adapted dark patterns. For example, in our implementation of Walls
of Text, several participants felt exhausted by at least one riddle they had
to solve to get the correct lever combination. While the riddles were intended
to enrich the gameplay by adding variety instead of just showing the correct
lever combination if the key hinted at in the Wall of Text was pressed, the
participants were instead annoyed by the riddles. Similarly, during Obstacle
Onslaught, we introduced two jump-and-run segments, which caused some
participants problems, while others reacted positively, stating that ”at least
this has finally become a video game” (P05). Both in Walls of Text and
Obstacle Onslaught, the participants focused more on the enriching game
elements when describing their experience, rather than on the game-adapted
dark pattern (e.g., having to look for Hidden Information or facing
Obstructions). In addition to enriching game mechanics overshadowing the game-
adapted dark patterns, we noticed that repeating a game-adapted dark pattern
to enrich the gaming experience too often (e.g., showing four Walls of Text
instead of two, using four obstacles in Obstacle Onslaught instead of three)
may be detrimental to the learning experience. While frustration is a part of
the game design, repeating the required countermeasure so often can cause
participants to get distracted from the actual game-adapted dark pattern.

###  5.2. Player Motivations and Driving Forces

Our thematic analysis revealed several motivating factors and driving forces
that participants used to justify their behavior. These factors may not only
be used to improve upon game-adapted dark pattern implementations but also
provide a different outlook on how users behave when faced with dark patterns
in general.

####  5.2.1. Curiosity

Curiosity appears at various points in the game, motivating players to do
things that sometimes hinder their progress by falling for game-adapted dark
patterns. For example, three participants justified their decision to accept
the Insensible Key Mapping with curiosity, stating that they ”want to know
what this preferred key mapping is” (P01). Similarly, multiple participants
justified their decision not to quit the game during Looping Gameplay even
though the hints on the wall hinted at it, with curiosity about new hints. For
example, P04 stated, ”I could continue until no new text gets added”. We
noticed that visible changes like the added hints on the wall or the
teleporters changing color (one of the strange behaviors the teleporters
exhibited) added to the participants’ curiosity, distracting them strongly
from the countermeasures to the dark patterns that were available to them.

####  5.2.2. Frustration and Resilience

At various points in the game, the participants’ behavior was influenced by
frustration. One such example is participants being frustrated by the
Insensible Key Mapping, motivating them to open the menu and change the key
mapping. Multiple participants expressed frustration during Walls of Text,
deciding to switch between different texts or skip text passages in hopes of
finding the solution without reading the entire text. During the later game,
in Obstacle Onslaught, multiple participants were frustrated enough with the
narrators persistent manipulation that they deliberately ignored the
teleporters he was trying to make them use. Reacting to the narrator asking to
have a screw to fix a teleporter, P01 stated, ”No, not anymore!” (as in they
will not give him screws anymore) following up with ”I probably wouldn’t make
any progress either.” Interestingly enough, things that frustrated some
participants did not seem to bother other, more resilient participants. Two
participants managed to complete the game without changing the key mapping to
a more common one, one participant approached Walls of Text by just reading
the texts, and multiple participants exhausted all available hints on the wall
in Looping Gameplay despite knowing they could quit the game.

####  5.2.3. Cost-Benefit Consideration

Another driving force behind participant decisions were cost-benefit
considerations. Especially when asked about why they did or did not give away
screws in Insistent Questioning, participants expressed that they decided at
each question individually whether the benefit of giving away the screw was
large enough. This was even apparent in some participants’ loud thinking
during the game, such as P09’s ”Well, if it makes it easier for me, then
sure!” Another segment of the game where cost-benefit consideration played a
large role is Obstacle Onslaught, where multiple participants started to
engage with the teleporters if they found the obstacles too difficult. P06
stated, ”I didn’t go to the teleporter immediately, but first looked at what
was in front of me. Then I did try it out when the path was not solvable.”

####  5.2.4. Conformity with Player Expectations

We found that some decisions in the game were influenced by what participants
expected video games to behave like. For example, during Insensible Key
Mapping, participants expressed that they expected the narrator to help and
initially trusted him (P02: ”I said I trust the Game. Yeah, he will know, what
is good for you.”) This also rang true about the key mapping itself, with
players expecting the key mapping to match the conventions for first-person
games (P06: ”At first, one would approach this benevolently and think ’the
narrator only means well’, it’ll be the right key mapping. And that standard
is WASD.”)

A similar expectation voiced by the participants is that the game has a
solvable ending. Many participants were surprised by the final necessary
action, i.e., exiting the game, with only two participants expressing that
they have seen something similar in games before. The other participants
behaved in a way that showed they expected an in-game solution. P02 summarized
this expectation very expressively: ”You see this ’Exit’ sign and you think:
’Yes! Thanks! This is where I can collect my carrot. My dopamine. The game is
over. Give yourself a pat on the back.’” When describing how they felt about
the missing in-game ending, P02 stated, ”I am dissatisfied. Definitely. I was
expecting one thing, and I did not get it.”

The most prominent example of player expectations shaping their behavior
however came from Winding Hallway & Shortcut. Namely, the dark parts of the
room and the dark corridor representing the shortcut reminded participants of
horror games. When asked about the lamp breaking to cue the participants that
there is more to the room than the illuminated path, P04 said, ”I am not a fan
of horror games. That is why I don’t turn around for such things.” Similarly,
P07 stated, ”This looks a bit scary. One thinks to themselves ’Okay, this is
what a classic horror game could look like.’” This expectation that there
might be horror elements in the game was so strong that even participants who
were told by the researchers that there were no horror elements in the game
did not go to investigate the dark areas of the room.

##  6\. Discussion

The results of our thematic analysis provide us with important cues into the
design and especially the implementation of game-adapted dark patterns. While
the game-adapted dark patterns were designed to represent dark pattern
concepts and line up with dark pattern examples, our results reveal that
several influencing factors play a role in how the game-adapted dark patterns
are interpreted and which factors influence player behavior when faced with
game-adapted dark patterns. The insights gathered allow us to generate new and
exciting research questions to be explored in upcoming work.

One research question derived from _Mapping Fidelity between Game-Adapted Dark
Patterns and Familiar Dark Pattern Examples_ is whether or not a high mapping
fidelity, i.e., a close match between game-adapted dark pattern and real dark
pattern examples, is actually more helpful for increasing awareness than a
more abstract mapping. We assume that while a close mapping does allow players
to more quickly recognize what is happening, it could also hinder the broader
interpretation of the dark pattern concept that is supposed to be conveyed.
For example, Sneaky Shop represents an exaggerated online shopping experience,
in which the shop actively adds items to the user’s shopping cart. However,
Sneaking can occur outside of shops and may not actively choose an option for
the user. Rather, Sneaking can make it seem like adding or accepting something
is required when it is actually optional (e.g. placing the newsletter
subscription checkbox right below a required checkbox). In such a situation, a
player who played an implementation of Sneaky Shop may not know the correct
countermeasure. On the other hand, a player who played Obstacle Onslaught
might not necessarily be able to identify Obstruction when it is happening,
but they may be encouraged to push through and not get distracted by
alternative offers when website providers are trying to use Obstruction
against them. Future research should therefore investigate how exactly mapping
fidelity of game-adapted dark patterns influences awareness and resistance.

When looking at _Balance Between Game-Adapted Dark Patterns and Enriching Game
Mechanics_ , it is evident that serious game designers need to account for
enriching game mechanics in their implementations of game-adapted dark
patterns. A balance needs to be struck between engaging players through
variety and novelty in the games, and raising awareness and bolstering
resistance through game-adapted dark patterns. We hypothesize that enriching
game mechanics should be the easier parts of serious games about dark
patterns, providing a contrast to the game-adapted dark patterns, which
frustrate players by design. How this balance influences the educational
success of game-adapted dark patterns is another exciting question for further
research.

As a concept for a serious game, it is important to think about how this game
would be presented to potential learners. In the case of our study, we did not
disclose the topic of the game before the end of the gameplay session. We
deliberately chose this to prevent a change in participant behavior based on
this knowledge. When looking at the results, we believe this to be a sensible
and possibly more successful approach compared to disclosing the game’s themes
before the gameplay session. As discussed in _Conformity with Player
Expectations_ , players have an initial trust in the game, and their behavior
is heavily guided by _Curiosity_ and _Frustration_. Disclosing that the game
is trying to manipulate them would foster distrust from the start and thus
might influence the success of learning. Observant players might figure out
the required countermeasures without first encountering the negative
consequences of falling for the dark pattern, inhibiting the building of
awareness. Therefore, future research should focus not only on the design of
game-adapted dark patterns but how to integrate them into an educational
environment where the concept can be used to its full potential.

##  7\. Limitations

Our work has several noteworthy limitations. As previously discussed, we
observed instances where certain game mechanics coincided with game-adapted
dark patterns, as well as instances where the implementation of a game-adapted
dark pattern employed dark pattern concepts from a different dark pattern.
While this overlap posed a challenge in isolating the specific impact of game-
adapted dark patterns in those particular cases, it allows us to explore the
intricate relationship between game mechanics and game-adapted dark patterns.

As is common with exploratory studies, our findings are context-dependent and
apply primarily to the specific environment and user group under examination,
especially when the sample size is rather small. Consequently, generalizing
our results should be approached with caution. Nonetheless, our work
introduces intriguing hypotheses that provide guidance for future research,
design, and implementation of game-adapted dark patterns. The presented
designs for game-adapted dark patterns and the narrator-based game concept
also provide a framework for researchers to more quantitatively evaluate the
success of this concept in raising awareness of and bolstering resistance
against dark patterns.

Additionally, the presence of certain usability issues within the game may
have inadvertently heightened participants’ frustration levels. It is
essential to note, however, that despite expressing annoyance during the
gameplay, participants, upon receiving a comprehensive debrief explaining the
study’s context, appeared to attribute these moments of frustration to
potential dark pattern manipulations, limiting the impact of the usability
issues on the participants’ opinions about the game-adapted dark patterns.

##  8\. Conclusion

In this paper, we presented a narrator-based serious game concept and
implementation along with seven game-adapted dark patterns designed to create
awareness of and bolster resistance against dark patterns through the
consequences of player actions. In a first exploratory study, we identified
important influencing factors for adapting dark pattern concepts into
gameplay, as well as player motivations and driving forces that influence
player behavior when faced with game-adapted dark patterns. From these, we
propose three new hypotheses for future research into game-adapted dark
patterns. Based on our work, future research could: 1.) explore the impact of
mapping fidelity of game-adapted dark patterns on awareness of dark patterns
in more detail. 2.) explore the balance and mutual interaction between the fun
provided by enriching game mechanics and the frustration inherent in game-
adapted dark patterns, and 3.) explore how game-adapted dark patterns can be
integrated into teaching processes while maintaining the important driving
forces of player expectations, curiosity, and frustration.

## References

  * (1)
  * Acquisti et al. (2015) Alessandro Acquisti, Laura Brandimarte, and George Loewenstein. 2015.  Privacy and human behavior in the age of information.  _Science_ 347, 6221 (2015), 509–514.
  * Acquisti and Grossklags (2005) Alessandro Acquisti and Jens Grossklags. 2005.  Privacy and rationality in individual decision making.  _IEEE security & privacy_ 3, 1 (2005), 26–33.
  * Akinyemi (2022) Opeyemi Priscilla Akinyemi. 2022.  _"Dark Cookie" - A serious game to train users to spot and interact with dark patterns in cookie banners_.  Master thesis. University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg.  http://hdl.handle.net/10993/52802
  * Alterio and McDrury (2003) Maxine Alterio and Janice McDrury. 2003.  _Learning through storytelling in higher education: Using reflection and experience to improve learning_.  Routledge.
  * Alvarez et al. (2011) Julian Alvarez, Damien Djaouti, et al. 2011\.  An introduction to Serious game Definitions and concepts.  _Serious games & simulation for risks management_ 11, 1 (2011), 11–15.
  * Anderson and von Seck (2020) Daniel Anderson and Richard von Seck. 2020.  The GDPR and its impact on the web.  _Network_ 1 (2020).
  * Becker (2021) Katrin Becker. 2021.  What’s the difference between gamification, serious games, educational games, and game-based learning.  _Academia Letters_ 209 (2021), 1–4.
  * Berger et al. (2019) Erlend Berger, Torjus H. Sæthre, and Monica Divitini. 2019.  PrivaCity: A Chatbot Game to Raise Privacy Awareness Among Teenagers.  In _Informatics in Schools. New Ideas in School Informatics_ , Sergei N. Pozdniakov and Valentina Dagienė (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11913. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 293–304.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33759-9{_}23
  * Bongard-Blanchy et al. (2021) Kerstin Bongard-Blanchy, Arianna Rossi, Salvador Rivas, Sophie Doublet, Vincent Koenig, and Gabriele Lenzini. 06282021.  ”I am Definitely Manipulated, Even When I am Aware of it. It’s Ridiculous!” - Dark Patterns from the End-User Perspective. In _Designing Interactive Systems Conference 2021_ , Wendy Ju, Lora Oehlberg, Sean Follmer, Sarah Fox, and Stacey Kuznetsov (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 763–776.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3461778.3462086
  * Bösch et al. (2016) Christoph Bösch, Benjamin Erb, Frank Kargl, Henning Kopp, and Stefan Pfattheicher. 2016.  Tales from the Dark Side: Privacy Dark Strategies and Privacy Dark Patterns.  _Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies_ 2016, 4 (2016), 237–254.  https://doi.org/10.1515/popets-2016-0038
  * Braun and Clarke (2006) Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006.  Using thematic analysis in psychology.  _Qualitative research in psychology_ 3, 2 (2006), 77–101.
  * Brignull and Leiser (2023) H. Brignull and M. Leiser. 13.09.2023.  Deceptive Patterns - Home.  https://www.deceptive.design/
  * Brignull et al. (2015) Harry Brignull, Marc Miquel, Jeremy Rosenberg, and James Offer. 2015.  Dark patterns-user interfaces designed to trick people. In _Proceedings of the Poster Presentation, Australian Psychological Society Congress, Sydney, NSW, Australia_. 21–23.
  * Conti and Sobiesk (2010) Gregory Conti and Edward Sobiesk. 2010.  _Malicious Interface Design: Exploiting the User_.  Ph. D. Dissertation. United States Military Academy, West Point, New York 10996.  https://doi.org/10.1145/1772690.1772719
  * Di Geronimo et al. (2020) Linda Di Geronimo, Larissa Braz, Enrico Fregnan, Fabio Palomba, and Alberto Bacchelli. 04212020.  UI Dark Patterns and Where to Find Them. In _Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems_ , Regina Bernhaupt, Florian ’Floyd’ Mueller, David Verweij, Josh Andres, Joanna McGrenere, Andy Cockburn, Ignacio Avellino, Alix Goguey, Pernille Bjørn, Shengdong Zhao, Briane Paul Samson, and Rafal Kocielnik (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376600
  * Farke et al. (2021) Florian M Farke, David G Balash, Maximilian Golla, Markus Dürmuth, and Adam J Aviv. 2021.  Are privacy dashboards good for end users? Evaluating user perceptions and reactions to Google’s My Activity. In _30th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 21)_. 483–500.
  * Giese and Stabauer (2022) Julia Giese and Martin Stabauer. 2022.  Factors that Influence Cookie Acceptance: Characteristics of Cookie Notices that Users Perceive to Affect Their Decisions. In _International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction_. Springer, 272–285.
  * Gray et al. (2018) Colin M. Gray, Yubo Kou, Bryan Battles, Joseph Hoggatt, and Austin L. Toombs. 26.04.2018.  _The Dark (Patterns) Side of UX Design_.  Ph. D. Dissertation. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174108
  * Gupta et al. (2020) Sameer Gupta, M. P. Gupta, Manmohan Chaturvedi, M. S. Vilkhu, Srishti Kulshrestha, Devottam Gaurav, and Ansh Mittal. 2020.  Guess Who? - A Serious Game for Cybersecurity Professionals.  In _Games and Learning Alliance_ , Iza Marfisi-Schottman, Francesco Bellotti, Ludovic Hamon, and Roland Klemke (Eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 12517. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 421–427.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63464-3{_}41
  * Hart et al. (2020) Stephen Hart, Andrea Margheri, Federica Paci, and Vladimiro Sassone. 2020.  Riskio: A Serious Game for Cyber Security Awareness and Education.  _Computers & Security_ 95 (2020), 101827.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2020.101827
  * Hoepman (2014) Jaap-Henk Hoepman. 2014.  Privacy Design Strategies. In _ICT systems security and privacy protection_ _(IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology)_ , Nora Cuppens-Boulahia, Frédéric Cuppens, Sushil Jajodia, Anas Abou El Kalam, and Thierry Sans (Eds.). Springer, Heidelberg, 446–459.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55415-5{_}38
  * Kahneman (2011) Daniel Kahneman. 2011.  _Thinking, Fast and Slow_.  Farrar, Straus and Giroux, [S.I.].
  * Kara (2021) Nuri Kara. 2021.  A systematic review of the use of serious games in science education.  _Contemporary Educational Technology_ 13, 2 (2021), ep295.
  * Krasnova et al. (2012) Hanna Krasnova, Natasha F Veltri, and Oliver Günther. 2012.  Self-disclosure and privacy calculus on social networking sites: The role of culture: Intercultural dynamics of privacy calculus.  _Wirtschaftsinformatik_ 54 (2012), 123–133.
  * Lewis (2014) Chris Lewis. 2014.  _Irresistible Apps: Motivational design patterns for apps, games, and web-based communities_.  https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-1-4302-6422-4.pdf
  * Liston (1994) Delores D. Liston. 1994.  _Story-Telling and Narrative: A Neurophilosophical Perspective_.  Technical Report. University of North Carolina.  https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED372092.
  * Lu et al. (2023) Yuwen Lu, Chao Zhang, Yuewen Yang, Yaxing Yao, and Toby Jia-Jun Li. 2023.  From Awareness to Action: Exploring End-User Empowerment Interventions for Dark Patterns in UX.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.17846_ (2023).
  * Maragkoudaki and Kalloniatis (2022) Sofia Niovi Maragkoudaki and Christos Kalloniatis. 2022.  Virtual Reality as a mean for increasing privacy awareness: The escape room example. In _Proceedings of the 26th Pan-Hellenic Conference on Informatics_ , Nikitas N. Karanikolas, Christos Troussas, Michael Gr. Vassilakopoulos, Stefanos Kollias, Christos Douligeris, and Ioannis Voyiatzis (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 261–266.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3575879.3576002
  * Mathur et al. (2019) Arunesh Mathur, Gunes Acar, Michael J. Friedman, Eli Lucherini, Jonathan Mayer, Marshini Chetty, and Arvind Narayanan. 2019.  Dark Patterns at Scale.  _Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction_ 3, CSCW (2019), 1–32.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3359183
  * Mathur et al. (2021) Arunesh Mathur, Mihir Kshirsagar, and Jonathan Mayer. 05062021.  What Makes a Dark Pattern… Dark?. In _Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems_ , Yoshifumi Kitamura, Aaron Quigley, Katherine Isbister, Takeo Igarashi, Pernille Bjørn, and Steven Drucker (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–18.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445610
  * Reiss (2004) Steven Reiss. 2004.  Multifaceted nature of intrinsic motivation: The theory of 16 basic desires.  _Review of general psychology_ 8, 3 (2004), 179–193.
  * Rogers (1975) Ronald W Rogers. 1975.  A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change1.  _The journal of psychology_ 91, 1 (1975), 93–114.
  * Schäwel (2018) Johanna Schäwel. 2018.  _How to Raise Users’ Awareness of Online Privacy: An Empirical and Theoretical Approach for Examining the Impact of Persuasive Privacy Support Measures on Users’ Self-Disclosure on Online Social Networking Sites_.  Ph. D. Dissertation.  https://doi.org/10.17185/duepublico/70691
  * Schiebener and Brand (2015) Johannes Schiebener and Matthias Brand. 2015.  Decision making under objective risk conditions–a review of cognitive and emotional correlates, strategies, feedback processing, and external influences.  _Neuropsychology review_ 25 (2015), 171–198.
  * Utz et al. (2019) Christine Utz, Martin Degeling, Sascha Fahl, Florian Schaub, and Thorsten Holz. 11062019.  (Un)informed Consent. In _Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security_ , Lorenzo Cavallaro, Johannes Kinder, XiaoFeng Wang, and Jonathan Katz (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 973–990.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3319535.3354212
  * Van den Broeck et al. (2015) Evert Van den Broeck, Karolien Poels, and Michel Walrave. 2015.  Older and wiser? Facebook use, privacy concern, and privacy protection in the life stages of emerging, young, and middle adulthood.  _Social Media+ Society_ 1, 2 (2015), 2056305115616149.
  * Vervier et al. (2017) Luisa Vervier, Eva-Maria Zeissig, Chantal Lidynia, and Martina Ziefle. 2017.  Perceptions of Digital Footprints and the Value of Privacy.. In _IoTBDS_. 80–91.
  * Xiao and Benbasat (2011) Bo Xiao and Izak Benbasat. 2011.  Product-Related Deception in E-Commerce: A Theoretical Perspective.  _MIS Quarterly_ 35, 1 (2011), 169–195.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/23043494
  * Zhonggen et al. (2019) Yu Zhonggen et al. 2019\.  A meta-analysis of use of serious games in education over a decade.  _International Journal of Computer Games Technology_ 2019 (2019).