The underlying ways in which sludges work are very similar to their alter ego, nudges. The main difference is that nudges promote active choices whereas sludges promote passive compliance by increasing frictions in intended behavioral pathways. For instance, a positive nudge that leans into the status quo bias is setting the default option to “opt-in” for a retirement plan. Conversely, sludges can use the same bias to get people to continue an expensive subscription (stick to the default) rather than cancel it.

But why do our brains fall for these sly traps? According to academic literature, there are six cognitive areas often targeted by sludge behavioral interventions:³ 

1. Attention: Exploiting limited attention by drawing it to desired actions (such as making the “Subscribe Now” button larger)
2. Perception: Manipulating perception to make something appear more appealing (like putting 50% off! on a price tag with the original price inflated)
3. Memory: Preying on our tendency to misremember past actions (like online stores reminding us about items left in the cart, and adding some more that they think we need)
4. Effort: Making certain actions like unsubscribing more effortful (such as the anecdote at the start!)
5. Intrinsic motivation: Appealing to emotions or personal values (such as joining a green initiative at a higher cost to appeal to pro-environmental sensibilities)
6. Extrinsic motivation: Offering small incentives disguised as large benefits (like a gift card worth $5… but only on a purchase of over $50)

Accompanying these cognitive processes, sludges and dark patterns often target emotions through manipulative language⁴—such as, No, I don’t want to protect my family from risk, something you may have encountered as an add-on when booking a flight ticket. Although you of course want to keep your family safe, the message intentionally manipulates you into spending more money by triggering the social norm of protection. It is important to be aware of such schemes that often prey on emotions so that you can identify and maneuver your way around them. This may entail being a little more vigilant the next time you encounter a new decision, whether that be offline (Are you sure you want to quit the gym and lose your progress in working toward your fitness goals?) or online (No, I don’t want to learn new skills that can help me earn more money!).

Whether drawing from cognitive or emotional processes, there is one invisible agent that seems to be behind almost every sludge or dark pattern—at least, every convincing one, anyway: dark creativity.

Although we’ve digressed a fair bit from Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein’s recommendation to “nudge for good,”⁵ it’s time to admit that dark patterns and sludges hinge on creativity. Often, it may seem like creativity is really hard to describe, but scientists have worked to develop a pretty standard way to define the term: it involves both originality and task-appropriateness. When Thaler and Sunstein introduced nudge theory in their 2008 eponymous book, nudges were any change in the choices available to individuals, without restricting their autonomy. Conversely, sludges and dark patterns do the opposite and often limit behavior creatively.

I know what you’re thinking: Surely that can’t be true! Creativity is meant to be sacred, right? 

Not really. When people come up with any original and out-of-the-box ways to meet their goals, creativity emerges. This makes the creative process more or less amoral—you can choose to use it to meet benevolent or malevolent ends. 

The dark side of creativity—also the title of behavioral scientists Francesca Gino and Dan Ariely’s now infamous article—is that unfortunately, people get good ideas to do bad things. In the context of dark patterns and sludges, these “bad things” can include creating cookies to get users to share much more data or time than they intended to or making it seem almost impossible to speak to a customer service representative (who isn’t a bot). 

Therefore, when behavioral science is leveraged for selfish gains, it marries the dark sides of this applied discipline with creativity. The “Hall of Shame”⁶—a website that collates examples of dark patterns by companies across the word—has numerous examples, including how an airline in India deliberately omits information when pre-booking your flight seats, confusing passengers and thickening the quicksand.⁷ Another instance that has particularly peeved me is X’s odd new ad format, which is quite cryptic in that there’s no way to skip it or even know if it’s an ad in the first place!⁸ 

And these deceptive designs expand beyond the digital realm, too! Once, I encountered a buffet at a hotel that was more expensive but quicker than ordering a la carte; it was as if servers were deliberately delaying and mixing up orders to get hungry customers to opt for the pricier option.

It’s bad enough when you encounter a sludge or dark pattern that prevents intended action. It’s much worse when that sludge or dark pattern is so original that it tricks you into performing a behavior you never meant to in the first place. This dark creativity can result in disastrous consequences that leave lasting impacts on people’s lives.⁹

It’s unreasonable to expect us to stay off the grid for the rest of our lives—but to be completely honest, that may be the only foolproof way to get around online behavioral sludges and dark patterns. (And even then, these tactics creep into real life all of the time!)

The next best method is to remember that service providers, whether they be public or private, may not always have your best interests at heart. I do not want to insinuate that all sludges are deliberate; some may be the result of poor design that has not been evaluated in decades, especially when it comes to the public sector. However, there are countless sludge-y designs that are intentional, and that intent may not be to improve your well-being—in fact, it might just be the opposite.

Here’s a list of ways you can spot and swerve around a sludge or dark pattern:

1. Understand that dark patterns come in varying shapes, sizes, and forms. Still, there are a few pretty common ones: confirmshaming (guilt-inducing language like the message I encountered when trying to delete that app), hidden costs (unexpected fees that are added on at the last minute), and misdirection (highlighting certain “optimal” options and making it difficult to navigate to others).
2. Know that sludges can be manipulative and often try to trick you into taking an unwanted action by creating unnecessary friction. (For instance, making the exit [x] button almost transparent to prevent you from skipping an ad.)
3. Remember that many sludges and dark patterns make use of psychological triggers such as artificially creating scarcity (Only one item left in stock) or urgency (Offer valid for 04:59).
4. Be mindful of your own tendencies to react and not respond. Instead, take the time to pause and consider decisions, especially financial ones. (Extend your warranty for just $9.99!)
5. Last, remember that sludges and dark patterns are constantly evolving, so you’ll need to stay vigilant in this intellectual arms race! 

If you’re still reading this piece and have realized that you aren’t only at the user end but part of an institution actively pushing sludges or dark patterns, this last section is for you. 

At a systemic level, there are several ways to review behavioral designs. The most famous one is called a sludge audit by Cass Sunstein,¹⁰ which is essentially a way to scrutinize processes and policies and identify mass design missteps. Think of it like a spring cleaning at an organizational level aimed at improving the choice architecture within the system and reducing unwanted friction. The NSW Behavioral Insights Unit in Australia has some resources to help you get started with identifying existing sludges and then correcting them.¹¹ 

But remember, these are toolkits and not a one-size-fits-all solution; what could have worked for one organization still needs to be tailored to suit your specific concerns. One way to begin the problem identification process is to have the auditor attempt to complete the process they’re auditing themselves; often, this will jumpstart ideation to remove the sludges encountered. 

Some firms also promote fair patterns as design solutions, with a focus on screening online interfaces for dark patterns and removing them.¹² Others have recommended an integrated approach for sludges and dark patterns, acknowledging the similarities between these suboptimal behavioral designs.¹³ There is very strong evidence for diagnosing and reducing sludges because they are costly and inevitably reduce trust in stakeholders.¹⁴

In the long run, I hope that the legacy behavioral science leaves in its wake is not one riddled with innovative ways to scam, trip, or manipulate consumers but a path toward better choices in the interest of the common good. Creativity is in the eye of the beholder—and once you realize that it’s part of the problem, you’ll notice that we can leverage the same originality to come up with solutions to move around the behavioral quicksand. Maybe the next time I try to uninstall an app, it will be a one-step action.