Unveiling the Expanding Landscape of Attention-Capture Damaging

Patterns

Tales Guarisa Gomes

, António Correia

, Jano de Souza

and Daniel Schneider

1,4

Postgraduate Program in Informatics, PPGI/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Faculty of Information Technology, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

Systems Engineering and Computer Science Program, PESC/COPPE/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Tércio Pacitti Institute of Computer Applications and Research, NCE/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Keywords: Attention-Capture Damaging Patterns, Dark Patterns, Deceptive Design, Digital Well-Being, HCI,

Polarization, Social Media, Social Polarization, Survey, Taxonomy.

Abstract: This paper aims to investigate, define, and classify a comprehensive set of Attention-Capture Damaging

Patterns (ACDPs) in the context of social media apps and platforms. A new taxonomy is proposed to

categorize ACDPs based on their mechanisms and psychological impacts on users. Building on the concept

of “dark patterns” and examining how they contribute to social polarization, this study explores the

intersection between digital interface design, digital well-being, and polarization. The paper analyzes several

examples of ACDPs present in popular platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, and Facebook,

proposing a new categorization based on three main categories. In addition, it discusses alternative design

strategies that promote healthier interactions on digital platforms, aiming to mitigate the negative effects of

these patterns and promote a more balanced digital environment.

1 INTRODUCTION

The design of digital interfaces has evolved

significantly in recent decades, especially with the

rise of social media as the predominant platform for

communication and social interaction. However, this

advancement has raised concerns about the negative

impacts of certain design patterns that seek to capture

user attention in a predatory manner. In 2010, Harry

Brignull introduced the concept of “dark patterns” to

describe deceptive design practices that manipulate

users into performing unwanted or unintended actions

on digital platforms (Brignull, 2020). Since then, the

terminology has evolved to “deceptive design”,

“damaging patterns”, and finally ACDPs, reflecting a

growing concern about the detrimental effects of

these strategies on users’ mental health and social

well-being.

Within this context, social polarization has

emerged as a significant side effect of the massive

adoption of ACDPs on digital platforms. Studies such

as that of Song and Boomgaarden (2017) indicate that

the combination of selective exposure to content and

interactions within interpersonal networks can create

reinforcing spirals, intensifying the polarization of

attitudes. These reinforcing spirals occur when users

are repeatedly exposed to information that confirms

their preexisting beliefs, isolating them in echo

chambers and exacerbating social divisions. This

paper aims to explore this intersection between

attention-capturing design patterns, digital well-

being, and social polarization, proposing a new

taxonomy to categorize and better understand the

impacts of these patterns.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows.

Section 2 provides background on the evolution of

ACDPs from “dark patterns” to harmful mechanisms

on digital platforms, highlighting frameworks like

Büchi’s proto-theory of digital well-being (2022) and

Song and Boomgaarden’s (2017) reinforcing spirals.

Section 3 outlines the methodology, including a

literature review, criteria for identifying ACDPs, and

strategies for mapping alternative patterns. Section 4

presents a preview of the taxonomy under

construction, classifying ACDPs into Cognitive

Manipulation, Compulsive Engagement, and Healthy

Use Disruption Patterns, with examples from

Instagram, TikTok, WhatsApp, Facebook, and

YouTube.

622

Gomes, T. G., Correia, A., de Souza, J. and Schneider, D.

Unveiling the Expanding Landscape of Attention-Capture Damaging Patterns.

DOI: 10.5220/0013440100003929

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS 2025) - Volume 2, pages 622-629

ISBN: 978-989-758-749-8; ISSN: 2184-4992

Section 5 analyzes the psychological and social

impacts of ACDPs, including anxiety and

polarization, and explores ethical alternatives to

promote digital well-being. Section 6 addresses study

limitations, such as data collection constraints and

platform-specific focus. Section 7 suggests future

research on testing alternative patterns across user

groups and their impact on societal issues. Section 8

concludes by summarizing findings and advocating

for ethical digital design.

2 BACKGROUND

This literature review has three main goals: first, to

expand the list of ACDPs identified in previous

studies, incorporating new examples observed on

popular digital platforms such as Instagram, TikTok,

WhatsApp and Facebook; second, to propose a new

taxonomy that classifies these patterns according to

their mechanisms, psychological effects and impacts

on user behavior; and third, to map alternative

patterns that can be adopted to mitigate the negative

effects of ACDPs, promoting a healthier and more

balanced experience for users.

The ACDPs discussed in this study are directly

related to the aforementioned social networks, with

practical examples of how these patterns affect users’

experience on these platforms. Furthermore, the new

proposed taxonomy categorizes ACDPs based on

their manipulation tactics, such as cognitive

manipulation patterns, compulsive engagement

patterns, and healthy use interruption patterns. By

mapping alternative patterns, this work identifies

design approaches that respect users’ autonomy,

promoting more ethical and healthy interactions.

3 METHODOLOGY

The methodology of this study is based on a

comprehensive analysis of the existing literature on

ACDPs in the main digital communication platforms.

Extensive searches were carried out in academic

databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science

and Google Scholar, aiming to identify relevant

studies that addressed detrimental design patterns,

their impacts on user engagement and behavior, as

well as the psychological and behavioral effects

associated with ACDPs.

Fundamental references, such as Brignull's (2020)

research on “deceptive design” and Song and

Boomgaarden's (2017) agent-based model, served as

foundations for mapping polarization dynamics and

attention capture mechanisms. Based on the detailed

information collected from each study, specific

examples of ACDPs, their operating mechanisms,

and the observed or theorized effects on users'

behavior and digital well-being were analyzed.

The critical synthesis of the data allowed us to

identify common patterns, gaps in the current

literature, and insights into how different ACDPs

affect users differently. Based on this analysis, a new

taxonomy was proposed to categorize these patterns,

reflecting their different intentions and impacts, and

contributing to a deeper understanding of the topic.

Additionally, this study expanded the list of ACDPs

by systematically reviewing recent design trends and

user behaviors observed in contemporary social

media platforms. Through a comparative approach,

new patterns were identified. This analysis was based

on their mechanisms, practical implications, or

psychological effects, further enriching the taxonomy

under construction.

Since Brignull (2020) introduced “dark patterns”,

several studies have documented their evolution and

impacts on user behavior. Büchi (2022) proposed in

“A Proto-Theory of Digital Well-Being” that digital

well-being should be understood from a perspective

that transcends the absence of negative impacts,

integrating practices that promote human flourishing.

Büchi argues that the design of digital platforms

should incorporate principles that promote autonomy,

balance, and conscious engagement of users,

contrasting with the harmful effects of ACDPs.

These patterns, such as auto-play videos,

persistent notifications, and infinite scrolling, create

cycles of continuous engagement, making it difficult

to stop consumption and increasing exposure to

potentially polarizing content. Song and

Boomgaarden (2017) demonstrate how these design

mechanisms can amplify attitudinal polarization by

reinforcing selective exposure and creating

reinforcing spirals that solidify preexisting beliefs

and limit openness to divergent perspectives.

Attitudinal polarization is the process by which

individuals become more extreme in their beliefs and

opinions, often in opposition to groups with different

views, and this can be exacerbated by external factors

such as mainstream media and online social

networks.

The literature review conducted in this study

revealed new instances of ACDPs on popular digital

platforms. The use of “Automatic Story Transitions”

on Instagram, for example, encourages continuous

viewing of content without allowing for natural

breaks, fostering an endless cycle of consumption that

Unveiling the Expanding Landscape of Attention-Capture Damaging Patterns

623

captures the user’s attention. According to Monge

Roffarello and De Russis (2019), practices such as

these negatively impact digital well-being by

eliminating stopping points and reducing the user’s

ability to reflect or disconnect.

Another relevant example is the use of “FOMO

Alerts” (Fear of Missing Out) — alerts that generate

anxiety by suggesting that the user is missing out on

something important, such as events or updates from

friends (Song & Boomgaarden, 2017). These alerts

exploit the fear of social exclusion and encourage

users to stay connected and attentive, often to the

detriment of their emotional well-being. Büchi (2022)

proposes that design alternatives, such as less

intrusive and more personalized notifications, can

reduce these negative effects and promote a more

balanced use of digital platforms.

3.1 Impact of ACDPs on Digital

Well-Being and Social Polarization

The impact of ACDPs on digital well-being is an

emerging field of study that benefits from an

intersectional approach, as Büchi (2022) suggested.

Harmful patterns that sustain user retention, such as

Streak Rewards and Engagement-Based

Notifications, can lead to digital dependency by

rewarding repetitive behaviors and promoting

continuous use (Monge Roffarello & De Russis,

2019). This dynamic also contributes to social

polarization, as prolonged exposure to targeted

content can intensify ideological divisions and reduce

tolerance for divergent perspectives (Alatawi et al.,

2021).

Social Media Induced Polarization (SMIP)

(Qureshi et al., 2020) involves interconnected

elements such as fake news, disinformation, hate

speech, echo chambers, and filter bubbles, all of

which amplify social and political conflict (Pimentel

et al., 2023). While Roffarello and De Russis (2023)

focus primarily on the impact of interface design and

gamification on digital well-being, discussing how

practices like infinite scrolling and compulsive

rewards increase anxiety and stress, they do not

directly address issues like hate speech or fake news.

However, these elements, studied extensively

elsewhere, are recognized for their role in promoting

toxic behaviors and heightening stress (Roffarello &

De Russis, 2023).

Continuous exposure to polarizing content can

profoundly affect mental health, fostering a sense of

constant conflict and alienation. Song and

Boomgaarden (2017) showed that selective exposure

to information reinforcing pre-existing beliefs can

lead to social isolation and polarization. This

phenomenon is compounded by echo chambers,

where interactions occur predominantly among

individuals with similar beliefs, amplifying ideas

without exposure to dissenting viewpoints (Zollo &

Quattrociocchi, 2018). While echo chambers

intentionally discredit opposing voices, filter bubbles

operate more passively through algorithmic content

personalization, further isolating users (Alatawi et al.,

2021).

By addressing these harmful patterns through an

ethical lens, the proposed taxonomy highlights the

urgency of balancing user engagement with digital

well-being.

3.1.1 Brain Rot and Cognitive Manipulation

Patterns

Patterns that exploit emotional triggers, such as

“FOMO Alerts” and “Emotionally Manipulative

Headlines”, amplify the effects of brain rot by

exposing users to constant stimuli that provoke

impulsive reactions and heighten anxiety. These

mechanisms create a heightened state of vigilance and

stress, which inhibits reflection and deep thinking.

Song and Boomgaarden (2017) demonstrate that

selective exposure to polarizing content fosters a

sense of conflict and alienation, further intensifying

cognitive and emotional saturation. Similarly, Ross et

al. (2019) explore how manipulative actors, including

bots, can exacerbate these dynamics by creating a

distorted opinion climate that pressures individuals

into conforming to a perceived majority opinion.

Rage-baiting, the deliberate provocation of anger to

drive engagement, is another extension of these

patterns, leveraging anger as a tool for retention and

further contributing to the mental strain experienced

by users, thus reinforcing the cyclical nature of brain

rot.

3.1.2 Implications for Mental Health and

Autonomy

The concept of brain rot encapsulates the cumulative

impact of ACDPs on cognitive capacity and mental

health, compromising user autonomy and intentional

platform usage. Büchi (2022) advocates for digital

design practices that foster balance and critical

reflection, contrasting sharply with the mechanisms

that exacerbate brain rot. Alternative solutions, such

as COMO (Comfortable Missing Out) prompts and

content summaries, could restore user control,

promote reflective pauses, and interrupt the cycle of

passive engagement. These alternatives emphasize a

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

624

more mindful interaction with digital platforms,

addressing the core issues driving compulsive use.

The phenomenon of brain rot illustrates the direct

consequences of predatory engagement mechanisms

employed by ACDPs. Coupled with practices like

rage-baiting, which exploit anger as an engagement

tool, these patterns illustrate how excessive,

unintentional platform use undermines focus, mental

health, and user autonomy. Platforms perpetuate

these dynamics through features designed to exploit

emotional intensity, ensuring continued engagement

while sacrificing user well-being.

Mitigating these effects requires a shift toward

ethical design practices, such as prioritizing neutral

headlines, customizable notifications, and reflective

prompts. By incorporating alternatives like COMO

Prompts and balancing engagement metrics with

mental health considerations, platforms can promote

a healthier, more intentional digital experience. This

reframing underscores the urgency of redefining the

role of digital platforms in an increasingly polarized

and attention-driven society.

Wiese, Pohlmeyer, and Hekkert’s (2024) research

further suggests that designing digital interfaces that

prioritize user well-being—as discussed in the Digital

Wellbeing Lens framework (Monge Roffarello & De

Russis, 2024)—can mitigate these adverse effects.

When a more balanced digital experience is fostered,

such design strategies can reduce the psychological

toll of prolonged exposure to polarizing content and

promote healthier engagement patterns.

4 RESULTS

The taxonomy being developed in this study

highlights the varied and complex nature of ACDPs,

which exploit user psychology in distinct ways to

manipulate digital experiences.

To account for these differences, the taxonomy is

divided into three main categories: Cognitive

Manipulation and Interface Ambiguity Patterns,

Compulsive Engagement Patterns, and Disruption of

Healthy Use Patterns. This work builds on previous

work by Monge Roffarello, De Russis, and Pellegrino

(2024), which, to the best of our knowledge,

identified a set of ACDPs together with associated

alternative patterns for the first time.

Table 1: A preview of the proposed taxonomy of Attention-Capture Damaging Patterns on Social Media.

Attention-Capture Damaging Pattern

(ACDP)

Alternative Pattern Category in the New

ACDP Taxonomy

Social Networks Where the

ACDP Occurs

FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) Alerts

Alerts that induce anxiety by suggesting

users are missing something important.

COMO (Comfortable Missing

Out) Prompts

Messages that promote the

importance of disconnecting

and enjoying the present

moment.

Cognitive Manipulation

and Interface Ambiguity

Patterns

Facebook, Instagram

Emotionally Manipulative Headlines

Platforms reward sensationalist

headlines that provoke emotional

reactions and clicks.

Neutral Headlines

Platforms reward informative

headlines that describe the

content clearly and objectively.

Cognitive Manipulation

and Interface Ambiguity

Patterns

Facebook, YouTube

Autoplay of Shared Reels

Shared reels automatically start the next

video after the previous one ends.

Press-to-Play

The system displays a

thumbnail with a "tap to play"

option.

Compulsive Engagement

Patterns

Instagram

Infinite Comments Scroll

Continuously loaded comments

encourage endless reading.

Comment Limit

Display a limited number of

comments with an option to

Compulsive Engagement

Patterns

YouTube, Facebook, Instagram

Endless Notifications and Engagement-

Based Notifications

Apps send constant notifications and

interaction alerts to keep users engaged.

Batch Notifications

Non-urgent notifications are

grouped and sent at specific

times.

Disruption of Healthy

Use Patterns

Facebook, Instagram, TikTok,

YouTube, WhatsApp

Time-Wasting Challenges

Challenges designed to keep users

engaged for long periods without a clear

purpose.

Purposeful Challenges

Challenges that promote

activities with tangible and

measurable benefits for the

user.

Disruption of Healthy

Use Patterns

TikTok, Instagram

Unveiling the Expanding Landscape of Attention-Capture Damaging Patterns

625

Cognitive Manipulation and Interface Ambiguity

Patterns involve mechanisms that leverage cognitive

or emotional biases, such as FOMO, to keep users

engaged. These patterns often use ambiguous or

misleading interfaces, which obscure decision-

making and exploit psychological vulnerabilities, as

exemplified by disguised notifications described by

Brignull (2020).

Compulsive Engagement Patterns, the second

category, include design elements that sustain

prolonged use and limit natural breaks in content

consumption, such as autoplay and infinite scrolling,

found prominently on platforms like TikTok and

Instagram. These mechanisms foster compulsive

habits, making it difficult for users to disengage.

Monge Roffarello and De Russis (2019) note that

such designs, which lack intentional stopping cues,

contribute to addictive behaviors that undermine user

well-being by creating a cycle of excessive

engagement.

The third category, Disruption of Healthy Use

Patterns, encompasses features that disrupt users'

ability to maintain a balanced relationship with digital

platforms. Frequent notifications, automatic video

countdowns, and time-wasting challenges on

platforms like YouTube interfere with users’

autonomy and time management, blurring the lines

between productive and unproductive interactions.

These practices often result in prolonged and

unintentional engagement, contributing to cognitive

fatigue and diminished well-being.

The study focused on major platforms—

Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and

WhatsApp — chosen for their global reach, cultural

significance, and diversified engagement

mechanisms. Platforms with extensive user bases and

widespread influence were prioritized, as their design

practices have far-reaching effects. Song and

Boomgaarden (2017) emphasize that algorithms and

recommendation systems on such platforms

exacerbate these dynamics, amplifying user

engagement while contributing to polarization.

The socio-cultural impact of each platform was

also considered. Platforms like Facebook and

Instagram have a central influence on identity

formation and opinion shaping, while TikTok and

YouTube, which attract younger demographics,

significantly contribute to contemporary digital

culture. WhatsApp, though primarily a messaging

platform, was included due to its pivotal role in

information dissemination and its ability to influence

social behaviors. These aspects underscore the

importance of analyzing ACDPs on platforms with

diverse user-profiles and cultural significance,

ensuring a comprehensive and relevant investigation.

The third criterion accounted for the diversity of

engagement mechanisms across platforms. For

instance, TikTok and Instagram heavily utilize

features such as infinite scrolling, autoplay, and

content personalization to sustain user engagement.

As one of the oldest platforms, Facebook leverages

constant notifications and automatic

recommendations that encourage continuous use.

YouTube promotes engagement through popularity-

based interaction notifications and countdowns that

autoplay subsequent videos, removing natural pauses

and creating a seamless consumption experience. In

the case of WhatsApp, message notifications

incentivize immediate responses, fostering

continuous interaction cycles and contributing to

digital dependency.

Applying this structure and the outlined criteria

enabled a practical and comparative analysis of the

new taxonomy. Consequently, it was possible to build

a structure (Table 1) that systematically organizes the

identified ACDPs by social media platform,

categorizing them into the three proposed types. This

structured approach facilitates understanding how

ACDPs operate across platforms and their effects on

user behaviors, whether contributing to digital well-

being or exacerbating dependency.

The creation of a taxonomy for ACDPs emerged

from the need to categorize and analyze these patterns

with precision, enabling a nuanced understanding of

their impacts on user behavior. This approach aimed

to differentiate ACDPs based on their psychological

effects and the mechanisms they employ to influence

and shape digital behaviors. Such a structured

framework provides a foundation for future

interventions and alternative design solutions

prioritizing digital well-being, as Büchi (2022)

emphasized, underscoring the need for design

practices that promote user autonomy and balance on

digital platforms.

This systematization of the taxonomy not only

standardizes the analysis of ACDPs but also supports

the development of alternative designs that prioritize

mental health and digital well-being. Categorizing

these patterns based on consistent criteria allows

researchers and developers to identify the most

problematic design practices across platforms and

propose targeted interventions. For instance,

addressing Compulsive Engagement Patterns through

customizable time limits and configurable

notifications aligns with Büchi’s (2022) principles of

promoting user balance and autonomy.

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

626

The development of the taxonomy also seeks to

raise awareness among both users and corporations

about the adverse effects of ACDPs on major social

media platforms. By systematically and transparently

mapping these patterns, the study hopes to encourage

big tech companies to adopt design practices that

foster healthier and more balanced digital

environments, promoting intentional and mindful

interactions. As part of both academic and

technological development, the proposed structure

not only organizes and characterizes ACDPs but also

serves as a starting point for creating design practices

that respect user autonomy and prioritize collective

mental health and well-being.

The expected outcome of this study is to provide

a refined and comprehensive taxonomy for

categorizing ACDPs, offering a robust framework to

analyze their mechanisms and psychological impacts

on users. By dividing these patterns into three primary

categories—Cognitive Manipulation and Interface

Ambiguity Patterns, Compulsive Engagement

Patterns, and Healthy Use Disruption Patterns—the

taxonomy provides a structured approach to

understanding how ACDPs influence digital

behavior. This categorization serves not only as an

analytical tool but also as a foundation for rethinking

design strategies that align with principles of digital

well-being.

Brignull (2020) and Song and Boomgaarden

(2017) have demonstrated how “Cognitive

Manipulation and Interface Ambiguity” Patterns

leverage psychological vulnerabilities to maximize

engagement, often without explicit user consent. The

proliferation of rage-baiting further intensifies these

effects by trapping users in cycles of emotional

manipulation and superficial content consumption.

“Compulsive Engagement” Patterns are

characterized by design mechanisms that foster

prolonged and habitual usage, creating seamless

cycles of consumption that users find difficult to

interrupt. These patterns exploit users’ desire for

novelty and achievement, reinforcing behaviors that

resemble addiction. Monge Roffarello and De Russis

(2019) highlighted the impact of such designs on

digital well-being, noting that they encourage passive

consumption and reduce users’ ability to engage

meaningfully with digital platforms. Büchi (2022)

further emphasizes that compulsive engagement

erodes autonomy, as users are drawn into repetitive

loops of low-value interactions. The phenomenon of

brain rot is particularly relevant here, as compulsive

engagement exacerbates cognitive depletion and

leaves users feeling mentally drained and disengaged.

Platforms like TikTok and Instagram epitomize this

trend with their reliance on infinite content loops and

gamified user incentives.

“Disruption of Healthy Use” Patterns interfere

with users’ ability to maintain intentional engagement

with digital platforms, disrupting boundaries between

online and offline life and leading to stress,

exhaustion, and diminished well-being. Monge

Roffarello and De Russis (2019) observed that such

patterns hinder healthy offline habits like rest and

focus, which are essential for cognitive recovery.

Büchi’s (2022) proto-theory of digital well-being

advocates for reflective and intentional use of

technology, contrasting sharply with the behaviors

encouraged by these patterns.

The taxonomy under construction and depicted in

this study categorizes ACDPs into three groups,

elucidating their varied impacts on digital well-being.

Cognitive Manipulation Patterns undermine decision-

making and clarity, Compulsive Engagement Patterns

foster addiction and fatigue, and Healthy Use

Disruption Patterns exacerbate stress and mental

health challenges. These insights highlight the

widespread presence of ACDPs across platforms like

Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and

WhatsApp, where features such as infinite scrolling,

autoplay, and deceptive notifications contribute to

cognitive overload and compulsive behavior.

Alternative strategies, such as COMO prompts

and batch notifications, offer ways to counteract these

negative effects by encouraging reflection,

autonomy, and balanced engagement. These

interventions align with Büchi’s vision of digital

well-being and suggest a pathway for mitigating the

harms of ACDPs. The study emphasizes the need for

a paradigm shift in digital design, prioritizing user

well-being and ethical engagement over short-term

metrics.

5 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

The taxonomy proposed in this study aims to provide

a multidimensional analysis of ACDPs by classifying

them into three overarching categories: Cognitive

Manipulation and Interface Ambiguity Patterns,

Compulsive Engagement Patterns, and Disruption of

Healthy Use Patterns. Each category highlights

specific psychological impacts these patterns have on

users, such as anxiety, compulsive behavior, and

decision fatigue, alongside ethical concerns regarding

user rights. For instance, Cognitive Manipulation

Patterns exploit emotional triggers like FOMO (Song

& Boomgaarden, 2017), undermining user autonomy

by inducing impulsive behaviors. Addressing these

Unveiling the Expanding Landscape of Attention-Capture Damaging Patterns

627

manipulations, the table introduces alternative

designs, such as COMO, a concept developed by the

first author of this paper, which encourages a healthy

detachment and reduces the anxiety driven by

constant digital connectivity.

Table 2 offers practical insights for designers,

policymakers, and researchers aiming to reduce the

harm caused by ACDPs. By showing the

psychological impacts, it underscores the need for

user-focused alternatives. Büchi (2022) argues that

digital platforms should center their designs around

autonomy, reflection, and balance. The table builds

on this idea, providing a clear framework to identify

harmful practices and promote ethical, transparent,

and sustainable design.

Table 2: Categorization of ACDPs: Categories and

Psychological Impacts.

Category Psychological Impact

Cognitive Manipulation and

Interface Ambiguity Patterns

- Anxiety (FOMO)

- Impulsive decisions

- Difficulty disconnecting

Compulsive Engagement

Patterns

- Compulsion and addiction

- Mental exhaustion

- Reduced focus and

productivity

Disruption of Healthy Use

Patterns

- Stress and fatigue

- Irritability

- Disruption of healthy habits

(sleep, rest)

6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

This study presents limitations that must be

acknowledged to contextualize its findings and

provide a basis for future research. First, as this is a

work in progress, the version presented in this article

is just a snippet of the expected final version, which

should be presented and discussed in follow-up

papers.

Second, the study focuses primarily on a

theoretical taxonomy of ACDPs and does not include

empirical validation through user-based experiments

or longitudinal studies. While established theories

and prior research inform the taxonomy, its practical

applicability and effectiveness in mitigating negative

outcomes require empirical testing. This limitation

restricts the study’s ability to make definitive claims

about the real-world impacts of proposed design

alternatives, such as COMO prompts or batch

notifications.

Another limitation lies in the platform-specific

analysis, which concentrates on major social media

platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok,

YouTube, and WhatsApp. These platforms represent

a significant share of global user engagement;

however, the findings may not be generalized to less

prominent platforms or niche digital environments.

Smaller platforms with distinct user demographics

and engagement mechanisms could exhibit unique

ACDPs that were not captured in this study.

Finally, while theoretically robust, the proposed

design alternatives were not evaluated for their

feasibility from a technical or business perspective.

Big tech companies operate within profit-driven

frameworks, and the implementation of ethical design

alternatives may face resistance due to concerns about

reduced user engagement and, therefore, reduced

revenue. This study does not address the economic

implications of these interventions, which could

influence their adoption in practice.

7 FUTURE RESEARCH

DIRECTIONS

This study provides a fundamental framework for

understanding ACDPs, but the work is ongoing, and

there is a need to deepen the understanding of ACDPs

and address their impacts. Future studies should

empirically validate the taxonomy under

construction, exploring the psychological and

behavioral effects of ACDPs through experimental

and longitudinal methodologies. These investigations

could also evaluate the effectiveness of alternative

design strategies, such as COMO prompts and

reflective interfaces, in fostering digital well-being

across diverse user groups.

Exploring cultural and contextual variations in the

impact of ACDPs presents another important avenue.

Social media platforms operate globally, but cultural

differences influence user behavior and the reception

of design patterns. Research on these variations could

guide the development of culturally sensitive and

inclusive digital design practices. Understanding how

emerging tools like AI and augmented reality shape

attention-capture dynamics is critical as technology

advances.

Moreover, as regulatory frameworks develop to

address the harms of ACDPs, studies should assess

their efficacy and identify best practices across

regions. Lastly, it must be mentioned that

interdisciplinary collaboration between psychology,

design, and policy is essential for creating ethical

design standards that balance user well-being with

platform objectives. By addressing these areas, future

ICEIS 2025 - 27th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems

628

research can drive the development of a healthier

digital ecosystem that prioritizes autonomy, mental

health, and social cohesion.

8 CONCLUSIONS

By systematically mapping ACDPs and analyzing

their psychological impacts, this study contributes to

understanding how design mechanisms in digital

platforms influence user behavior, cognitive

autonomy, and mental health.

The findings reveal the pervasive influence of

ACDPs in fostering harmful user behaviors, such as

compulsive engagement, emotional exhaustion, and

diminished cognitive capacity. These patterns may not

only compromise individual well-being but also

contribute to broader societal issues, such as

polarization and the erosion of social cohesion.

The proposed taxonomy serves as both an

analytical tool and a practical guide for addressing the

adverse effects of ACDPs. The exercise of

categorizing these patterns based on their mechanisms

and impacts creates a framework that enables

researchers, developers, and policymakers to identify

problematic design practices. More than that, it allows

these interest groups to propose targeted interventions.

Solutions such as COMO prompts, transparent

interface designs, and customizable user controls

represent promising avenues for mitigating the

negative effects of ACDPs and fostering a more

balanced digital experience. These interventions align

with Büchi’s (2022) proto-theory of digital well-

being, which advocates for design practices that

promote autonomy, intentionality, and human

flourishing.

The implications of this study extend beyond

theoretical contributions, offering actionable insights

for the development of ethical design practices. The

study does that by demonstrating that alternative

design patterns can support long-term user

engagement without sacrificing well-being. This

research challenges the prevailing narrative that

prioritizes short-term metrics over sustainable

interaction.

Ultimately, this study underscores the urgency of

a paradigm shift in digital design—one that places

user well-being at its core. As digital platforms

continue to shape societal interactions on an

unprecedented scale, adopting ethical and user-

centered design practices is not only a moral

imperative but also a strategic necessity for ensuring

the sustainability and inclusivity of these technologies.

This shift has the potential to redefine the role of

digital platforms in an increasingly interconnected and

polarized world by fostering environments that respect

user autonomy and promote collective mental health.

REFERENCES

Alatawi, F., Cheng, L., Tahir, A., Karami, M., Jiang, B.,

Black, T., & Liu, H. (2021). A survey on echo chambers

on social media: Description, detection and mitigation.

arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.05084.

Brignull, H. (2020). What is deceptive design? Available at:

https://www.deceptive.design/. Accessed: December

27, 2021.

Büchi, M. (2022). A Proto-Theory of Digital Well-Being.

University of Zurich.

Pimentel, A. P., et al. (2023). Agenda of Solutions to

Mitigate the Challenge of Polarization of Extreme

Positions in Social Media Environments. Proceedings

of the 2023 26th International Conference on Computer

Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD),

1944-1949.

Monge Roffarello, A., & De Russis, L. (2019). The race

towards digital wellbeing: Issues and opportunities. In

Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human

factors in computing systems (pp. 1-14).

Monge Roffarello, A., De Russis, L., & Pellegrino, M.

(2024). Digital Wellbeing Lens: Design Interfaces That

Respect User Attention. In Proceedings of the 2024

International Conference on Advanced Visual

Interfaces (pp. 1-5).

Qureshi, I., Bhatt, B., Gupta, S., & Tiwari, A. A. (2020).

Causes, symptoms and consequences of social media

induced polarization (SMIP). Information Systems

Journal, 11, 1-11.

Roffarello, A. M., & De Russis, L. (2023). Achieving

digital wellbeing through digital self-control tools: A

systematic review and meta-analysis. ACM

Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 30(4),

1-66.

Ross, B., Pilz, L., Cabrera, B., Brachten, F., Neubaum, G.,

& Stieglitz, S. (2019). Are social bots a real threat? An

agent-based model of the spiral of silence to analyse the

impact of manipulative actors in social networks.

European Journal of Information Systems, 28(4), 394–

412. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2018.1560920

Song, H., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2017). Dynamic Spirals

Put to Test: An Agent-Based Model of Reinforcing

Spirals Between Selective Exposure, Interpersonal

Networks, and Attitude Polarization: An Agent-Based

Model of Reinforcing Spirals. Journal of

Communication, 67(2), 256–281.

https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12288

Wiese, L., Pohlmeyer, A., & Hekkert, P. (2024). Daily

doses of wellbeing: How everyday technology can

support positive activities.

Zollo, F., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2018). Polarization and

Fake News: Early Warning of Potential Misinformation

Targets. IEEE Internet Computing, 22(5), 5-9.

Unveiling the Expanding Landscape of Attention-Capture Damaging Patterns

629