Download
Abstract

We conduct the first large-scale field experiment on how consent interface design affects privacy choices, using a browser extension to randomize interfaces that consumers face during their natural web browsing. Deliberate obstruction—hiding rejection options behind additional clicks—reduces selection of hidden choices by 70% relative to the baseline rates, while visual manipulations produce modest effects. Surprisingly, these design effects do not systematically advantage popular websites over smaller competitors. During organic browsing, 22% of users close banners without choosing, yet hold varying beliefs about what closure implies, making defaults critical. A structural welfare analysis reveals that current US practices reduce consumer surplus by 23.5% relative to manipulation-free interfaces, but browser-level consent mechanisms improve welfare by 150% compared to any site-by-site approach. The dominant factor is time costs: users spend 6.6 minutes weekly on consent interactions worth $4/week, suggesting that current regulatory focus on banner design may miss larger architectural solutions.

Citation

Farronato, Chiara, Andrey Fradkin, and Tesary Lin. “Designing Consent: Choice Architecture and Consumer Welfare in Data Sharing.” (2025).

@article{farronato2024data,
  title={Designing Consent: Choice Architecture and Consumer Welfare in Data Sharing},
  author={Farronato, Chiara and Fradkin, Andrey and Lin, Tesary},
  year={2025},
  journal={Working Paper}
}
Funding
  • Internet Services Grant