Tommy Jepsen

Ux Research Methods

Guide selecting the right UX research method for a given situation. Use this skill whenever the user asks which research method to use, how to plan UX research, what research to do at a given product stage, how to study user behavior vs. attitudes, how to pick between qualitative and quantitative approaches, or whether to run interviews, usability tests, surveys, A/B tests, or any other UX research technique. Also trigger when the user describes a research question and wants a recommendation, or when they ask about the tradeoffs between specific methods. Trigger even if the user just says "what research should I do" or "how do I learn more about my users" without naming specific methods.

Skill Markdown
Download .md|

UX Research Methods Advisor

Purpose

Help teams choose the right UX research method based on their situation. Recommendations are driven by three dimensions: attitudinal vs. behavioral, qualitative vs. quantitative, and context of product use — plus the phase of product development.

Step 1: Understand the Situation

Before recommending, clarify the following (ask if not stated):

  1. What question are you trying to answer?

    • Why is something happening / how to fix it → qualitative
    • How many / how much → quantitative
    • What users say they think/want → attitudinal
    • What users actually do → behavioral

  2. What stage is the product in?

    • Strategize (early, finding direction)
    • Design (improving a specific flow or feature)
    • Launch & Assess (measuring performance, comparing)

  3. Do you need users interacting with the product?

    • Natural use (observing real behavior)
    • Scripted use (specific tasks/flows)
    • Limited/abstracted (concepts, IA, card sorting)
    • No product (brand perception, concept validation)

  4. What constraints exist?

    • Timeline and budget
    • Access to participants
    • Remote vs. in-person

Step 2: Apply the Three-Dimensional Framework

Attitudinal ↔ Behavioral

| Want to know... | Lean toward | |---|---| | What users believe, prefer, or say they'd do | Attitudinal (surveys, interviews, focus groups) | | What users actually do with the product | Behavioral (A/B testing, analytics, eyetracking) | | Both | Mixed (usability testing, field studies) |

Qualitative ↔ Quantitative

| Want to know... | Lean toward | |---|---| | Why something happens, insights, nuance | Qualitative (interviews, field studies, usability testing) | | How many, how often, statistical confidence | Quantitative (surveys, A/B testing, analytics) | | Both | Card sorting, concept testing, unmoderated testing |

Context of Product Use

| Context | When to use | Example methods | |---|---|---| | Natural use | Understand real behavior without interference | Field studies, analytics, intercept surveys | | Scripted use | Evaluate specific flows or features | Usability testing, benchmarking | | Limited/abstracted | Test IA, concepts, or design alternatives | Card sorting, tree testing, participatory design | | No product | Brand or concept perception | Focus groups, desirability studies |

Step 3: Match to Product Development Phase

🔍 Strategize — Find directions and opportunities

Goal: Understand users, discover needs, generate ideas

Best methods:

  • Field studies — observe users in their real environment
  • Diary studies — longitudinal, user-recorded behavior/attitudes
  • Interviews — in-depth one-on-one exploration
  • Surveys — discover and measure attitudes at scale
  • Participatory design — co-create with users
  • Concept testing — validate whether an idea meets a need

🎨 Design — Improve usability and design quality

Goal: Identify and fix problems in the experience

Best methods:

  • Card sorting — define or validate information architecture
  • Tree testing — verify navigation structure
  • Usability testing (moderated) — observe task completion, find friction
  • Remote moderated testing — same as above, done remotely
  • Unmoderated testing — scalable task-based testing without a moderator

📊 Launch & Assess — Measure and compare performance

Goal: Benchmark against prior versions or competitors

Best methods:

  • Usability benchmarking — precise performance metrics across participants
  • Unmoderated testing — scalable summative evaluation
  • A/B testing — scientifically test design variants on live traffic
  • Analytics / Clickstream analytics — measure actual behavior at scale
  • Surveys — measure satisfaction and attitudes post-launch

Step 4: Method Reference

| Method | Attitudinal/Behavioral | Qual/Quant | Best phase | |---|---|---|---| | Usability testing | Both | Qualitative | Design | | Field studies | Both | Qualitative | Strategize | | Contextual inquiry | Both | Qualitative | Strategize | | Participatory design | Attitudinal | Qualitative | Strategize | | Focus groups | Attitudinal | Qualitative | Strategize | | Interviews | Attitudinal | Qualitative | Strategize | | Eyetracking | Behavioral | Qualitative/Quant | Design | | Usability benchmarking | Behavioral | Quantitative | Launch & Assess | | Remote moderated testing | Both | Qualitative | Design | | Unmoderated testing | Both | Both | Design / Launch | | Concept testing | Attitudinal | Both | Strategize | | Diary studies | Both | Qualitative | Strategize | | Customer feedback | Attitudinal | Both | Any | | Desirability studies | Attitudinal | Both | Design | | Card sorting | Attitudinal | Both | Design | | Tree testing | Behavioral | Quantitative | Design | | Analytics | Behavioral | Quantitative | Launch & Assess | | Clickstream analytics | Behavioral | Quantitative | Launch & Assess | | A/B testing | Behavioral | Quantitative | Launch & Assess | | Surveys | Attitudinal | Quantitative | Any |

Output Format

When making a recommendation, structure the response as:

  1. Recommended method(s) — with a brief rationale
  2. Why this fits — reference the relevant dimension(s) and phase
  3. What you'll learn — what question it answers
  4. Watch out for — key limitation or pitfall of this method
  5. Also consider — 1–2 complementary methods if relevant

Keep recommendations concrete and actionable. If multiple methods fit, help the user prioritize by constraints (time, budget, access to users).

Common Traps to Avoid

  • Only using one method: Most projects benefit from combining methods (e.g., interviews to generate hypotheses, then surveys to validate at scale).
  • Confusing attitudinal and behavioral: What users say they do and what they actually do often diverge. When behavior matters, prioritize behavioral methods.
  • Using qualitative methods to get quantitative answers: A usability test with 5 participants can't tell you what % of users have a problem — it tells you why they do.
  • Using surveys to diagnose why: Surveys tell you what and how many, not why.
  • Running benchmarking too early: Summative methods require a stable product to produce meaningful metrics.

Other Skills

ux storyboard

Create UX storyboards from scratch, from user research, or from existing journey maps. Use this skill whenever a user wants to create a storyboard, visualize a user scenario, illustrate how a user interacts with a product, or communicate a UX story to a team or stakeholders. Also trigger when the user asks to "sketch a user flow", "show how a user would use X", "create a scenario illustration", "map out a use case visually", or wants to present research findings in a visual, narrative format. Even if the user doesn't say "storyboard" explicitly — if they want to show a sequence of steps a user takes, trigger this skill.

accessibility

Review screenshots, mockups, designs, and UI flows for accessibility using WCAG 2.1. Use when the user asks for an accessibility audit, WCAG review, inclusive design critique, contrast review, keyboard or screen reader concerns, form accessibility, accessible UI recommendations, or asks whether a design is accessible. Focus on practical WCAG 2.1 A and AA issues visible in the design, and clearly separate visual findings from implementation checks that require code or interaction testing.

ai governors

Apply the Governors framework to design or audit human-in-the-loop features that keep users informed, in control, and safe as AI acts autonomously. Use this skill whenever someone is designing or reviewing AI product features involving oversight, trust, transparency, or control — including "how do I keep users in the loop", "how should I handle risky AI actions", "users don't trust the AI", "how do I prevent costly AI mistakes", "should I ask for confirmation before this action", "how do I show AI reasoning", "users are scared the AI will overwrite their data", "how do I handle AI memory and privacy", or any request about making an AI feature feel safe and controllable. Trigger even when the user doesn't say "governor" or "human-in-the-loop" — if they're designing any AI feature and the question touches on control, trust, transparency, cost, risk, or oversight, use this skill.

Tommy Jepsen - design engineer in Copenhagen

Let's connect on LinkedIn ✌️

Dropping random thoughts, AI experiments, product design insights and more.