The UX of Deception: Unpacking the Psychology Behind Lenskart’s BOGO Illusion

When a deal looks too good to resist, is it genuinely saving you money, or is the interface influencing how you perceive value?

The Illusion of a Great Deal We have all experienced that little rush of excitement when we discover an irresistible offer. A product originally priced at ₹4,000 is suddenly available for ₹2,000. Better still, the website promises a Buy One, Get One Free deal. Two pairs of glasses for what feels like the price of one. It sounds like a win.

You add your frames to the cart, explore a few lens options, enter your prescription details, and proceed to checkout. Somewhere along the way, the final amount starts looking different from what you expected. Perhaps there is an additional charge, a membership offer, or a premium lens upgrade that seems difficult to refuse.

You pause. Was this really the bargain you thought it was?

This is where an ordinary shopping experience becomes an interesting UX case study.

Lenskart, one of India's prominent eyewear retailers, provides a useful lens through which to examine the relationship between promotional marketing, interface design, and consumer psychology. Its promotional offers raise a broader question: when does persuasive design stop helping users make decisions and start influencing them in ways they would not knowingly choose?

The distinction matters. A discount is not inherently deceptive. Neither is an upsell, a premium product recommendation, or a membership programme. Businesses are entitled to market their products and encourage customers to spend more.

The problem begins when the presentation of an offer creates expectations that the actual transaction does not fulfil.

In the UX industry, this territory is often discussed through the concept of dark patterns, interface designs that steer people towards decisions that may benefit a business at the expense of the user's interests.

To understand how this operates, let's examine the psychology behind promotional pricing, checkout friction, lens recommendations, and the subtle power of interface choices, treating these as UX patterns to investigate rather than assuming malicious intent.

1. The BOGO Trap: How Price Anchoring Shapes Perceived Value Imagine seeing a pair of eyeglasses displayed like this: ₹4,000 ₹1,999 Below the price sits a prominent banner: BUY 1 GET 1 FREE.

Before you have examined the frame's quality, compared alternatives, or considered its actual market value, your brain has already begun evaluating the offer. This is the power of price anchoring.

The psychology of the crossed-out price: Anchoring is a cognitive bias in which people rely heavily on an initial piece of information when making a subsequent judgement. In retail, the original price often becomes that reference point.

When a product is presented as costing ₹4,000 before being reduced to ₹1,999, the higher figure influences how the lower one is perceived. Instead of asking, "Is ₹1,999 a fair price for these glasses?", a shopper may ask, "How much am I saving compared with ₹4,000?"

The crossed-out price becomes the reference point. The discounted price feels like a gain, and the difference between the two becomes a perceived saving.

A displayed MRP does not, by itself, establish that a product is worth that amount in the market. Nor does a large discount automatically mean that a customer is receiving an exceptional deal. That depends on factors such as the product's quality, comparable alternatives, prevailing prices, and whether the reference price is genuine.

This does not establish that Lenskart artificially inflates its prices. Such a conclusion would require a verified pricing history and comparable market data. The UX lesson, however, is straightforward: a price can influence a user's perception of value without proving that the product offers equivalent economic value.

The framing effect: When two products feel like a reward Now add the BOGO offer. "Buy One, Get One Free" is more than a pricing statement. It is a framing device.

Compare these two messages:

• "Two pairs of glasses for ₹3,998."

• "Buy One, Get One Free!"

The underlying transaction might be identical, but the second message frames the purchase as a reward. It directs attention towards what the customer appears to gain rather than the total amount they must spend. A BOGO offer can be genuinely valuable, but someone who needs only one pair might spend more than intended because the promotion makes the additional purchase feel financially irrational to refuse.

The interface shifts the user's mental calculation from "Do I need this?" to "Why would I pass up this saving?"

2. The Checkout Squeeze: The Cost of Discovering Fees Too Late The customer has selected their frames. They have entered their prescription, chosen their lens type, and spent several minutes comparing options. They are ready to pay.

Then the total changes.

Drip pricing: Revealing the real cost one step at a time Drip pricing describes a pricing practice in which additional charges are revealed progressively, rather than being clearly communicated upfront.

If additional charges are material to the decision, revealing them only at the end makes it harder for the customer to evaluate the true cost before investing time in the purchase. From a UX perspective, this creates a mismatch between the user's expectation and the interface's eventual demand.

A transparent interface communicates relevant fees early, distinguishes optional extras from required charges, and updates the running total whenever a selection changes.

Sneak-into-basket: When the cart contains more than the user chose Another dark-pattern category to investigate is sneaking, items or services being added to a basket without the user's clear consent.

Displaying an optional membership alongside a purchase is not, on its own, sneaking. Automatically including an unwanted paid service without meaningful consent, requiring the user to actively remove it, crosses that line. To evaluate Lenskart’s practices objectively, one must review the exact cart behavior to see if add-ons default to an opt-in or opt-out state.

The sunk-cost fallacy: Why users keep going Why might someone accept an unexpected charge instead of abandoning the purchase? The sunk-cost fallacy. By the time the user reaches checkout, after browsing frames, entering prescriptions, and comparing lens specifications, starting over elsewhere feels exhausting.

This behavioral phenomenon is a useful warning for designers: a business should not depend on late disclosures and accumulated user effort to make an otherwise unattractive purchase feel difficult to abandon.

3. The Lens Upsell: When Visual Hierarchy Influences Health Decisions Eyewear introduces a different kind of UX responsibility because customers are making decisions involving comfort, prescription requirements, and eye care.

Choice architecture and default bias Visual hierarchy determines what people notice first. Labels suggest what is important. Defaults make some decisions easier than others.

If a premium lens package receives the strongest visual emphasis, via bright badges or "recommended" tags—users may interpret that prominence as evidence that it is the best choice for them. While a premium product may genuinely offer advantages, a prominent badge does not automatically establish that it is medically necessary.

The interface should explain the practical differences between products, identify relevant limitations, and allow users to compare costs and benefits without having to decode marketing language.

Confirmshaming: Making the cheaper option feel irresponsible When a user declines an upgrade, the language used matters. Imagine an interface that asks a user to decline an upgrade by clicking: "No, I don't want to protect my eyes."

This is an example of confirmshaming: wording that attempts to make users feel guilty or irresponsible for declining an offer. It leverages health anxiety to pressure a choice. When investigating eyewear checkouts, we must look at the specific opt-out language. An ethical alternative is straightforward: "Continue with standard lenses."

4. From Persuasive Design to Dark Patterns: Where Is the Line? Persuasive design is not inherently unethical. Businesses need to communicate value and encourage purchases. The distinction lies in the relationship between the business's objective and the user's ability to make an informed decision.

• Persuasive design: A relevant lens upgrade is recommended, its benefits are explained accurately, and the customer can decline it easily.

• Poor UX: The premium option dominates the screen, the comparison is confusing, and the cheaper alternatives are difficult to evaluate.

• Potentially deceptive design: The interface uses misleading health claims, obscures material charges, or defaults the user into an optional paid service.

The same principle applies to BOGO offers. A clearly explained promotion that delivers the promised benefit is legitimate marketing.

The Consumer Court Context To fully understand the implications of these practices when they fail to deliver on user expectations, we must look at real-world consequences. In June 2026, a consumer court reportedly fined Lenskart ₹20,000 for failing to honour a Buy One, Get One Free promise.

When verified, a ruling of this nature shifts the conversation from theoretical UX design directly into consumer protection. A promotional promise that is not honoured raises legal and ethical concerns beyond the interface itself. While a single dispute does not prove that every checkout flow employs dark patterns, it underscores the tangible risks of prioritising aggressive conversion tactics over transparent customer experiences.

5. What Product Designers Should Do Differently The responsibility for ethical design does not rest on visual designers alone. Pricing policies, product strategy, and business incentives all influence the final experience. Still, designers have a meaningful role in making commercial interfaces more transparent.

1. Show the real cost early: Display relevant charges before users invest heavily in the journey. Update the running total when selections change.

2. Make promotions understandable: Explain which products qualify, how the discount is calculated, and whether additional conditions apply.

3. Design upsells around user needs: Recommend premium products based on relevant requirements, providing accurate comparisons rather than leveraging health anxieties.

4. Make declining as easy as accepting: Use neutral language, comparable visual treatment, and clear controls. Avoid confirmshaming.

5. Measure trust, not just conversion: Test whether users understand the promotion and recognise optional charges. Monitor complaints and post-purchase satisfaction.

A successful interface should not merely persuade someone to click the purchase button. It should help them understand what they are buying, what they will pay, and why the decision makes sense for them.

Good UX solves user problems. Dark UX exploits user psychology. The difference is not how effectively an interface sells, it is whether the user remains in control of the decision.

About the Author Jerry Melvin J is a Product Designer specializing in e-commerce architecture and scalable design systems based in Bengaluru. View my full portfolio at jerrymelvinj.com.