Dark Patterns Meet GUI Agents: LLM Agent Susceptibility to Manipulative Interfaces and the Role of Human Oversight
read the original abstract
The dark patterns, deceptive interface designs manipulating user behaviors, have been extensively studied for their effects on human decision-making and autonomy. Yet, with the rising prominence of LLM-powered GUI agents that automate tasks from high-level intents, understanding how dark patterns affect agents is increasingly important. We present a two-phase empirical study examining how agents, human participants, and human-AI teams respond to 16 types of dark patterns across diverse scenarios. Phase 1 highlights that agents often fail to recognize dark patterns, and even when aware, prioritize task completion over protective action. Phase 2 revealed divergent failure modes: humans succumb due to cognitive shortcuts and habitual compliance, while agents falter from procedural blind spots. Human oversight improved avoidance but introduced costs such as attentional tunneling and cognitive load. Our findings show neither humans nor agents are uniformly resilient, and collaboration introduces new vulnerabilities, suggesting design needs for transparency, adjustable autonomy, and oversight.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
DPAgent-in-the-Middle: Agentic Defense and Repair Against AI-Groomed Deceptive Patterns
DPAgent is an agentic framework that detects 90.98% of AI-groomed deceptive samples and repairs 77% of deceptive interfaces while exploring 80% of pattern types with 10% of baseline page visits.
-
Comparing Human Oversight Strategies for Computer-Use Agents
Oversight strategy in computer-use agents shapes exposure to problematic actions more reliably than correction success, with plan-based approaches reducing occurrences but not uniformly improving interventions.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.