Author(s):
Sivakami R, Sweitha K.
Email(s):
sivakamir@mccblr.edu.in
DOI:
10.52711/2321-5763.2026.00018
Address:
Sivakami R1*, Sweitha K.2
1Associate Professor, Department of Post Graduate Studies, School of Commerce, Mount Carmel College, Autonomous, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
2M.Com – International Business, Department of Post Graduate Studies, School of Commerce, Mount Carmel College, Autonomous, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
*Corresponding Author
Published In:
Volume - 17,
Issue - 2,
Year - 2026
ABSTRACT:
As the digital commerce environment grows rapidly in India, online retail websites and mobile applications have increasingly adopted manipulative design strategies which is commonly referred to as dark patterns to influence consumer decision making and ultimately to increase traffic and sales. The main aim of this conceptual study to explore two major types of these manipulative tactics: urgency based messages (invisible pressure) and sneak into basket mechanisms (hidden additions), with focus on behavioural and ethical implications for Indian consumers. The study addresses a significant research gap by focusing specifically on the Indian context, arguing that the behavioural and ethical outcomes are shaped by specific characteristics of the Indian culture and market. The research indicated that urgency based messages tap into psychological factors such as the Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) and the pressure of limited that causing buyers to make quick decisions without sufficient thinking which often resulting in stress, regret, and declining trust on the brand over time. On the other hand, hidden additions lead to an information asymmetry and violate consumer autonomy through the manipulation of consent that creates dissatisfaction for consumers post-purchase and creates perceptions of unfair treatment. Furthermore, this study shows that emotional factors like hedonic motivation and brand attachment serves to increase consumer vulnerability to these dark patterns. Based on an comprehensive review of secondary literature, the paper illustrates the behavioral and ethical effect of these patterns, concluding that these manipulative strategies may lead to short term conversion gains, they often create negative emotional responses, customer dissatisfaction and long-term damage to brand trust and loyalty. This research explains implications for ethical user interface design and consumer protection in Indian e-commerce by emphasising the need for regulatory action, transparent marketing, AI-based detection systems and digital literacy as an intervention to protect consumers and prevent manipulative practices. The paper provides a conceptual foundation for future empirical research exploring consumer trust, ethical marketing, and automated dark pattern detection in online retail environments.
Cite this article:
Sivakami R, Sweitha K.. Invisible Pressure and Hidden Additions: Behavioural and Ethical Impact of Urgency and Sneak-Into-Basket Patterns in Indian Online Retail. Asian Journal of Management. 2026;17(2):121-6. doi: 10.52711/2321-5763.2026.00018
Cite(Electronic):
Sivakami R, Sweitha K.. Invisible Pressure and Hidden Additions: Behavioural and Ethical Impact of Urgency and Sneak-Into-Basket Patterns in Indian Online Retail. Asian Journal of Management. 2026;17(2):121-6. doi: 10.52711/2321-5763.2026.00018 Available on: https://ajmjournal.com/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2026-17-2-4
REFERENCES:
1. Adebiyi AA, Adewumi AO, Ayo CK. Comparison of ARIMA and artificial neural networks models for stock price prediction. J Appl Math. 2014; 2014:614342. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/614342
2. Agyarko E. Hybrid model for stock market volatility. J Probab Stat. 2023; 2023: 6124649. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/6124649
3. Ali S, Zhang J, Abbas M, Draz MU, Ahmad F. Symmetric and asymmetric GARCH estimations and portfolio optimization: Evidence from G7 stock markets. SAGE Open. 2019; 9(2): 2158244019850243. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019850243
4. Andersen TG, Bollerslev T. Answering the skeptics: Yes, standard volatility models do provide accurate forecasts. Int Econ Rev. 1998; 39(4): 885–905. https://doi.org/10.2307/2527343
5. Awartani BMA, Corradi V. Predicting the volatility of the S&P‐500 stock index via GARCH models: The role of asymmetries. Int J Forecast. 2005; 21(1): 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2004.05.003
6. Bollerslev T. Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity. J Econom. 1986; 31(3): 307–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(86)90063-1
7. Cheikh NB, Zaied YB, Chevallier J. Asymmetric volatility in cryptocurrency markets: New evidence from smooth transition GARCH models. Finance Res Lett. 2020; 35: 101397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2019.101397
8. Engle RF. Autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity with estimates of the variance of United Kingdom inflation. Econometrica. 1982; 50(4): 987–1007. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912773
9. Glosten LR, Jagannathan R, Runkle DE. On the relation between the expected value and the volatility of the nominal excess return on stocks. J Finance. 1993; 48(5): 1779–1801. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1993.tb05128.x
10. Hassan MR, Nath B, Kirley M. A fusion model of HMM, ANN and GA for stock market forecasting. Expert Syst Appl. 2007; 33(1): 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.04.002
11. Michańków J, Kwiatkowski Ł, Morajda J. Combining deep learning and GARCH models for financial volatility and risk forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01063. 2023. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.01063
12. Moghaddam AH, Moghaddam MH, Esfandyari M. Stock market index prediction using artificial neural network. J Econ Finance Adm Sci. 2016; 21(41): 89–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jefas.2016.07.002
13. Mostafa F, Saha P, Islam MR, Nguyen N. GJR-GARCH volatility modelling under NIG and ANN for predicting top cryptocurrencies. J Risk Financ Manag. 2021; 14(9): 421. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14090421
14. Omari-Sasu A, Frempong N, Boateng M, Boadi R. Modelling stock market volatility using GARCH approach on the Ghana Stock Exchange. Int J Bus Manag. 2015; 10(11): 169–181. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v10n11p169
15. Ou P, Wang H. Financial volatility forecasting by least square support vector machine based on GARCH, EGARCH and GJR models: Evidence from ASEAN stock markets. Int J Econ Finance. 2015; 2(1): 51–58. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v2n1p51
16. Priya S, Sharma R. Impact of COVID-19 on Indian stock market volatility: Evidence from GARCH models. J Risk Financ Manag. 2023; 16(10): 447. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm16100447
17. Rajamohan S, et al. COVID-19 pandemic and indices volatility: Evidence from GARCH models. J Risk Financ Manag. 2020; 16(10):447. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm13100447
18. Shakeel M, Arya H. Modelling and forecasting intraday volatility with range-based GARCH models for Indian stock market. Int J Econ Bus Res. 2024; 28(5): 633–650. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEBR.2024.10058138
19. Wei J, Yang S, Cui Z. Integrated GARCH-GRU in financial volatility forecasting. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.09380. 2025. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.09380
20. Yao J, Tan CL, Poh HL. Neural networks for technical analysis: A study on KLCI. Int J Theor Appl Finance. 1999; 2(2): 221–241. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219024999000147
21. Zhang YJ, Zhang H. Volatility forecasting of crude oil market: Which structural change based GARCH models have better performance? Energy J. 2023; 44(1). https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.44.1.yzha
22. Zhao P, Zhu H, Ng WSH, Lee DL. From GARCH to neural network for volatility forecast. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06642. 2024. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.06642
23. Manu KS, Menda VL. Dynamics of Indian stock market integration with global stock markets. Asian J Manag. 2017; 8(3): 559–568. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5763.2017.00090.7
24. Rao CS. Selected public sector banks performance in stock market–risk analysis. Asian J Manag. 2014; 5(4): 382–387.
25. Susruth M. Application of GARCH models to forecast financial volatility of daily returns: An empirical study on the Indian stock market. Asian J Manag. 2017; 8(2): 192–200. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5763.2017.00030.0
26. Majumdar A, Saha A. Influence of macroeconomic variables on stock market volatility: A study on Nifty. Asian J Manag. 2018; 9(1): 440–444. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5763.2018.00068.9
27. Narwal KP, Chhabra P. An insight of implied volatility vis-a-vis its informational efficiency, association with underlying assets and spillover effects. Asian J Manag. 2018; 9(2): 967–977. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5763.2018.00153.1
28. Mangala D, Verma A. Financial risk tolerance of individual equity investors in Indian stock market. Asian J Manag. 2018; 9(2):990–998. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5763.2018.00156.7
29. Tanty G. Assessing the Bombay Stock Exchange index volatility through GARCH model. Asian J Manag. 2019; 10(3): 236–240. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5763.2019.00037.4
30. Sethi A. Predictive modeling of CNX Nifty 200 from a valuation perspective. Asian J Manag. 2019; 10(1): 14–18. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5763.2019.00003.9
31. Verma R, Behera R. Indian stock markets’ reaction to the nationwide lockdown due to COVID-19: Evidence from event study analysis. Asian J Manag. 2024; 15(1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.52711/2321-5763.2024.00001
32. Savita, Dhameja SK. Measurement of time varying volatility and its relation with noise trading: A study on Indian stock market using GARCH model. Res J Humanities Soc Sci. 2019; 10(2): 479–483. https://doi.org/10.5958/2321-5828.2019.00079.2