IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04913806.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effect of Design Patterns on (Present and Future) Cookie Consent Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Nataliia Bielova

    (PRIVATICS - Privacy Models, Architectures and Tools for the Information Society - Centre Inria de l'Université Grenoble Alpes - Inria - Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique - CITI - CITI Centre of Innovation in Telecommunications and Integration of services - INSA Lyon - Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon - Université de Lyon - INSA - Institut National des Sciences Appliquées - Inria - Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique - Centre Inria de Lyon - Inria - Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique)

  • Laura Litvine

    (BIT - Behavioural Insights Team)

  • Anysia Nguyen

    (BIT - Behavioural Insights Team)

  • Mariam Chammat

    (DITP - Interministerial Directorate for Public Transformation)

  • Vincent Toubiana

    (Cnil - Commission nationale de l'informatique des libertés - CNIL)

  • Estelle Hary

    (RMIT University - Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University)

Abstract

Today most websites in the EU present users with a consent banner asking about the use of cookies or other tracking technologies. Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) need to ensure that users can express their true preferences when faced with these banners, while simultaneously satisfying the EU GDPR requirements. To address the needs of the French DPA, we conducted an online experiment among 3,947 participants in France exploring the impact of six different consent banner designs on the outcome of users' consent decision. We also assessed participants' knowledge and privacy preferences, as well as satisfaction with the banners. In contrast with previous results, we found that a "bright pattern" that highlights the decline option has a substantial effect on users' decisions. We also find that two new designs based on behavioral levers have the strongest effect on the outcome of the consent decision, and participants' satisfaction with the banners. Finally, our study provides novel evidence that the effect of design persists in a short time frame: designs can significantly affect users' future choices, even when faced with neutral banners.

Suggested Citation

  • Nataliia Bielova & Laura Litvine & Anysia Nguyen & Mariam Chammat & Vincent Toubiana & Estelle Hary, 2024. "The Effect of Design Patterns on (Present and Future) Cookie Consent Decisions," Post-Print hal-04913806, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04913806
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04913806v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04913806v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    2. Jachimowicz, Jon M. & Duncan, Shannon & Weber, Elke U. & Johnson, Eric J., 2019. "When and why defaults influence decisions: a meta-analysis of default effects," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 159-186, November.
    3. Russell Golman & David Hagmann & George Loewenstein, 2017. "Information Avoidance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 96-135, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_03, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    2. David L. Dickinson, 2020. "Deliberation enhances the confirmation bias. An examination of politics and religion," Working Papers 20-06, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    3. Simon Gächter & Eric J. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2022. "Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 599-624, April.
    4. Dickinson, David L., 2024. "Deliberation, mood response, and the confirmation bias in the religious belief domain," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    5. Liu, Jia & Sonntag, Axel & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2022. "Information defaults in repeated public good provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 356-369.
    6. Sullivan, Nikki & Breslav, Alexander & Doré, Samyukta & Bachman, Matthew & Huettel, Scott A., 2025. "The golden halo of defaults in simple choices," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126086, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Robinson, Peter John & Botzen, W. J. Wouter & Kunreuther, Howard & Chaudhry, Shereen J., 2021. "Default options and insurance demand," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 39-56.
    8. Joaquina Couto & Leendert van Maanen & Maël Lebreton, 2020. "Investigating the origin and consequences of endogenous default options in repeated economic choices," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, August.
    9. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Sarah F. Small & Steven Pressman, 2024. "Introduction to the Symposium Celebrating Fifty Years of the Eastern Economic Association," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 50(4), pages 436-440, October.
    11. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    12. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    13. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    14. Daniel Agness & Travis Baseler & Sylvain Chassang & Pascaline Dupas & Erik Snowberg, 2022. "Valuing the Time of the Self-Employed," Working Papers 2022-2, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    15. Chorvat, Terrence, 2006. "Taxing utility," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, February.
    16. Lippens, Louis & Baert, Stijn & Derous, Eva, 2021. "Loss aversion in taste-based employee discrimination: Evidence from a choice experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    17. Keval Amin & Erica Harris, 2022. "The Effect of Investor Sentiment on Nonprofit Donations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(2), pages 427-450, January.
    18. Celse, Jeremy & Karakostas, Alexandros & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2023. "Relative risk taking and social curiosity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 243-264.
    19. Romain Espinosa & Thibaut Arpinon & Paco Maginot & Sébastien Demange & Florimond Peureux, 2024. "Removing barriers to plant-based diets: assisting doctors with vegan patients," Post-Print hal-04479493, HAL.
    20. Michael Ziegelmeyer & Julius Nick, 2013. "Backing out of private pension provision: lessons from Germany," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 40(3), pages 505-539, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    GDPR - General Data Protection Regulation; Compliance; Decision-making; Consent banner; Cookie banner; Dark patterns; Interface design;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04913806. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.