The design do’s and don’ts for getting the user opt-in on iOS 14.5+

It’s important to note that the utilization of dark patterns is not always intentional, and many companies are making a conscious effort to avoid them. When experimenting with your ATT implementation, you should do your best to identify and avoid the use of these patterns. If you would like to dive deeper into dark patterns, we encourage you to check out this research paper on the topic.

In some conversations we’ve had with app developers, a few have reported that their app was rejected from the App Store before they could begin testing their ATT implementation. Based on their feedback, we’ve collected three patterns that have resulted in App Store rejection thus far:

Nagging

In the context of dark patterns, nagging is a repeated intrusion where the end-user is interrupted one or more times by another task not directly related to the one they are focusing on.

One developer made use of a pre-permission prompt before triggering the ATT consent pop-up. If a user declined to consent to the ATT popup, the app would trigger a custom prompt again, either later in the same session or a subsequent session, with a deep link that leads into the end user’s privacy settings. Once there, users would be able to change their previous response to the IDFA pop-up. Another developer informed us that their app was similarly rejected for repeating the pop-up after the end user’s decision was made.

In response to their rejections, Apple viewed these implementations as “nagging” and responded:

"The permission request process on iOS is designed to give users control of their personal information. It is important to respect the user's decisions about how they want their data used. If they decide to not grant permission to your app, they should not be prompted to change their mind or be forced to reject the request multiple times."

Sneaking

Sneaking is defined as an attempt to hide, disguise, or delay divulging information relevant to the user. Sneaking often occurs in order to make the user perform an action they may have objected to if they knew of it.

Another app saw itself rejected after triggering the ATT pop-up right after the user agreed to the main consent GDPR banner. Within the context of this proximity and timing, Apple believed that this specific positioning would influence the user’s decision to opt-in to the ATT.

Interface interference

Interface interference is defined as any manipulation of the user interface that privileges specific actions over others, thereby confusing the user or limiting discoverability of important action possibilities.

In this instance, the app developer triggered their pre-permission prompt and displayed visual queues alongside it that may subconsciously influence the end user. By positioning a thumbs up emoji near the ‘allow’ button, it was seen as interference when it came to the end-user making their own, unbiased, choice to consent to tracking.

Additionally, the pre-permission prompt should not act as a consent prompt on its own. While this was not the actual IDFA pop-up, Apple maintains that pre-prompts should serve only to educate the end user about their decision and not influence the action they take.

In the above instances, the app publishers with whom we were in contact were all able to correct the highlighted issues and get back into the store. Now that we know what steps to consciously avoid, let’s dive into the designs that have yielded more favorable results.

Messaging

Pre-permission prompts that cue the ATT framework and emphasize the value users can gain from opting-in have typically performed well. However, you need to toe the line here between delivering value without creating a content overload. We recommend staying within the range of 2 - 3 short and succinct sentences. As always, follow best practices for UI copy: opt to use the fewest words to say the most, and choose the easiest words to read and understand.

What was apparent from the tests was that users are particularly looking for direct, personal value. This means demonstrating what content your app offers to them specifically. In this respect, it is important to note that social comparison did not perform as well.

Size

Fairly consistently across all tests, we have seen that users respond better to pre-permission prompts that are full-screen rather than modals. The reasoning for this is that the full-screen prompt has a more seamless user experience, especially when it is designed to align with the specific screen it is served after. By contrast, modal screens feel like an interruption and are reminiscent of unsolicited pop-ups and ads. This may be a reason for them seeing far lower opt-in rates across the board.

Button placement

The placement and design of your call-to-action buttons can be treated as low-hanging fruit. Although this does not contribute as strongly to opt-in rates as the other trends discussed here, both academic research into GDPR notices and anecdotal evidence from iOS 14 testing has offered largely aligned results.

Using simple terms such as “Later” and “Next” horizontally next to one another, and in that order, prompts users to take an affirmative action. Using the positive acceptance on the right hand sign aligns with how we understand moving on to a next step.

In contrast, vertically stacking your buttons forces readers to slow down and more carefully pick their choice. This does not drive user engagement, and it can frustrate users, as it is more difficult to reach this part of the screen.