Evey H.

In our recent exploration of UX research responsibilities, Brian Utesch, Lawton Pybus and I identified four key areas that define roles at varying seniority levels: hands-on research, enabling research, mentorship, and collaboration To learn more about these responsibilities, and how they change over time read: https://lnkd.in/edt3Mp7s

80

3 Comments

I don't think we're talking enough about the UX limitations of LLMs. A chat #UI is just too primitive and the 'randomization' aspect of each generation makes refinement nearly impossible. As a thought experiment, I'm suggesting there are three levels of #LLM #UX: Level 1: Chat in and out Existing chat UX Level 2: Masked Chat Still chat based, but hidden behind an app that turns visual actions into chat prompts and renders it back to the user. Level 3: Addressable output A knowledge based API that allows for much more nuanced reference and refinement of an interaction. Even things like Copilot are "level 1.2" at best as you're just taking the text in the IDE and pasting the chat output into another window. Proper level 2 UIs are more like what TLDraw did with their sketching tool. There wasn't an ascii character in sight. (but it's still all ascii behind the scenes) Level 3 is pure speculation on my part (and likely needs to be more nuanced) I'm just saying that when I'm asking an agent to do something, I want to tweak the output which is hard today. Having a more refined concept of the output as well as a means to reference and then redo parts of it would go a long way.

51

11 Comments

How Feminist Theory Informs My Approach to UX Research ✨ As I dove deeper into UX research, one idea from feminist theory that deeply resonated with me was the resistance to essentialism—the belief that there’s no single, universal experience for any group of people. This concept has transformed how I approach user personas, user testing, and the design process. Feminist theory challenges us to reject oversimplified categories, just as UX asks us to rethink the notion of a "typical" user. By applying an intersectional lens to UX research, we can better understand how overlapping identities—such as race, gender, class, and ability—influence user interactions and experiences. This leads to more inclusive, accessible solutions that reflect the full diversity of human experiences. Bridging feminist theory and UX research has enriched my approach to design, ensuring we move beyond the "average" user and create for a broader spectrum of people. 💡 Curious to learn more? Check out my full article on Medium, where I dive deeper into how these principles guide my work in UX research.🔍 Have you found insights from other fields that have shaped your thinking about UX? I’d love to hear your thoughts. #UXResearch #FeministTheory #Intersectionality #InclusiveDesign #UserExperience #Essentialism

7

Jeff Sauro and James R. Lewis, could you help clarify why it’s recommended to report the frequency of users who encounter specific issues (e.g., problem_a, problem_b, etc.) in iterative formative usability tests, particularly with small sample sizes (e.g., 4 out of 6 participants experienced problem_a; 2 out of 6 participants experienced problem_b)? From what I understand, using the frequency of issues from a small sample in a single formative usability test isn’t reliable for (1) generalizing the likelihood of occurrence across the broader population, or (2) prioritizing which problems are more “important” based on their frequency in the test. This is especially true since other factors, like severity, can be equally or more important, and as you’ve outlined in your work, severity is independent of how often a problem is encountered. Is this a correct assumption? I’d appreciate any insights on what I might be misunderstanding I understand the binomial probability formula, as explained in Quantifying the User Experience, is helpful for estimating the likelihood of problem detection in terms of minimum probability, likelihood of detection, and the cumulative likelihood of meeting discovery goals. However, I’m stuck on this point: If we set the minimum number of detections to 1, doesn’t the actual probability of occurrence in the broader population for a small sample usability test remain unknown, even if 4 out of 6 participants experienced problem_a? This doesn’t necessarily imply that problem_a occurs more frequently than problem_b, which was experienced by only 2 out of 6 participants, right? I realize the binomial probability model isn’t meant to be used deterministically, but I’m struggling to understand why we report issue frequencies within small formative usability samples when operating iteratively. From my experience, doing so can lead stakeholders to prioritize issues based purely on their frequency in a given round, even when other criteria should be considered Wouldn’t it be more useful to frame it differently, such as saying, “All of these issues are likely to affect 31% or more of users,” assuming we use a probability of .31, aim for an 85% chance of detecting the issue, and set the minimum number of detections to 1? Then we could apply additional evaluation criteria, such as David Travis’ problem severity framework, for prioritization, among other framework Can you help me understand what I’m missing or misunderstanding?

9

6 Comments

Stop expecting researchers to be easy to work with. We’re not here to make things comfortable. Yesterday, I had a conversation with Kate Moran about the tension between UX research and business goals. She said something that stuck with me: “𝑈𝑋 𝑓𝑜𝑐𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑠𝑜 𝑚𝑢𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑛 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑡 𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑔𝑜𝑎𝑙𝑠. 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑒, 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡 𝑡𝑒𝑎𝑚𝑠 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑏𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑡-𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚 𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑠. 𝑊𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑛 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟.” This isn’t new. I’ve spent years trying to bridge the gap – making research actionable and aligned with business needs. But in 2025? I’m done smoothing things over. This year, I’m leaning into punk sociology, an idea by David Beer. Not to fix that divide, but 𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐭 – to stay inspired and challenge the status quo. Here’s what that looks like: 1️⃣ Find meaning in the chaos ↳ The best insights come from messy, unfiltered realities – not “The Mom Test” book and neat reports. 2️⃣ Ask the hard questions ↳ “Why?” and “What if?” aren’t just tools – they’re ways to disrupt stale thinking. 3️⃣ Be difficult, but valuable ↳ Researchers aren’t here to fit into the system. We’re here to push boundaries. If we’re not making you uncomfortable, we’re not doing our job. 💬 𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐚 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐮𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠? Curious about how punk sociology can inspire your work? ↳ Let me know in the comments – I’ll share more if there’s interest. ♻️ Repost if you believe in challenging the status quo.

34

5 Comments

This article captures much about my experience in UXR at Google over the last 7 years and what it means to be a successful part of product development. As one of the greats, Asif Baki has said it, our work is to develop a gut instinct, but it has to be not just for ourselves, but through and with the entire team if we are going to empower product impact. "The answer does not lie in adding more researchers who focus on learning on behalf of the many. It’s in expanding the role of researchers to focus on empowering everyone to learn."

57

Once the recordings become available, I highly recommend Dan Russell's keynote speech for the UXQuant conference. What stands out to me most is his insight, paraphrased, "Bad UX will negate good AI". Now that there is AI in every possible thing and in their tail, we need thoughtful and ecologically informed UX professionals. #AI #UX #UXQuant

3

Serious? I gave a talk on Empirical Software Design & Tidy First yesterday. I got a question about how Rich Hickey advocates doing some "serious" design first. I'm afraid I interrupted the questioner. There's nothing inherently serious about speculative design. Empirical Design is serious--you're making design decisions in context. You're making decisions in the flow of features. You can't afford to break the current behavior. Serious! But I'm sorry I interrupted the questioner.

213

12 Comments

Episode 237 of The World of UX is now available! In this potpourri segment, Darren addresses four topics: 1) Clarifying skill needs for those interested in UX freelancing or consulting; 2) an overlooked critical need for those building an in-house UX team; 3) identification and management of strawman discussions and 4) the need to view UX job postings with a critical eye. Enjoy! https://lnkd.in/eQRBjRDV

6

1 Comment

UX Real-World Problem Solving: Staying Warm in Winter ❄️ Understanding user needs is key to designing effective solutions. Here's how I approached the problem of staying warm in winter: 👥 Users ● Families with kids ● WFH individuals ● Elderly people 🔥 Pain Points ● High energy bills ● Safety concerns ● Difficulty controlling temperature 💡 Solutions ● Smart Heaters: Energy-efficient and family-friendly ● Infrared Heaters: Great for small spaces/work desks ● Layering Clothes: Simple and effective for everyone ● Energy Savers: Thermal curtains to lock in heat Designing is all about solving real problems! How would you tackle this? 🚀 #UXDesign #DesignTips #LinkedInLearning

7

🔍 Shadowing: Revisiting Anthropology Resources for UX Research In preparation for an upcoming research project, I found myself diving back into my Anthropology degree notes—particularly focusing on the concept of shadowing. 🌍📚 Shadowing is an observational method where the researcher follows a participant through their daily routines, capturing behaviours, interactions, and the subtle dynamics that often go unnoticed. This technique, first coined by Wolcott in 1973, offers a unique lens through which to understand actions and environments without the researcher’s active participation. Here’s a brief guide 📝 on how to set up a research project using shadowing: - Define Clear Objectives: Start with precise research questions that the shadowing will address. - Select Participants Thoughtfully: Choose individuals or environments that closely align with your research goals. - Plan Your Observation Strategy: Establish observation units and categories beforehand, and decide on the timing and frequency of observations. - Record Meticulously: Focus on detailed note-taking, separating pure observations from interpretations. - Analyze Early and Often: Begin coding your data early to identify emerging themes and refine your approach as you go. Key Aspects to Be Mindful Of ⁉️: - Bias Awareness: Be conscious of personal values, social dynamics, and power structures that might influence observations. - Ethical Considerations: Avoid covert observations unless ethically justified, and respect participants' privacy and autonomy. - Self-Reflection: Regularly reflect on your own positioning and influence within the research environment. - Patience and Relationship Building: Cultivate patience for the often slow process of observation and build trust with participants to gain deeper insights. Essential Documents to Prepare 📚: - Research Protocol: Outline research questions, participant selection criteria, and observation plans. - Field Guides: Prepare detailed guides for recording observations, including categories and timing. - Field Notes and Logs: Maintain comprehensive records of observations, context, and interactions. - Ethical Guidelines: Document consent forms and protocols for ensuring participants' rights and data protection. In this project, I’m excited to apply these principles and see where they lead. As researchers, revisiting foundational knowledge is more than just a refresher—it’s an opportunity to enhance our approach and adapt these timeless techniques to new contexts. #ResearchMethods #Ethnography #Shadowing #Fieldwork #Anthropology #UserResearch #ResearchTips #AcademicInsights #QualitativeResearch #LearningJourney #ProfessionalGrowth #ResearchProject

6

Design Systems folks: do you feel you're doing the right work? On Friday I'll be co-hosting the excellent Question with Ben Callahan, where DS practitioners get together for a deep-dive discussion into the topic of the week. This week, we'll be exploring what work you think your team should be doing (and isn't?), and why. All you have to do to get an invite is answer the question! See you Friday! ✨ Answer here: https://bit.ly/3UgkJSc ✨

23

3 Comments

As an instructor with a new batch of graduating designers, many points in this article resonated with me! What do you think? As the UX industry continues to level out, foundational design theory and soft skills are still most desirable for entry-level. Hard skills can be taught on the job! “We should seek out smart candidates with intangible soft skills and mentor their hard skills, rather than quick filtering for hard skills exclusively and hoping the soft skills are sufficient.” @EdwardLiu vi UX Collective How are YOU standing out with your portfolio? What makes YOU different from the many, many other applicants? #designthinking #designeducation #designcommunity #studentportfolios #designjobs

10

"More respondents reporting being “comfortable” or “very comfortable” reaching out to an individual they were directly referred to or to listed code, document, or bug owners than they did using an internal question forum called YAQS or reaching out to a mailing list. When asked to elaborate on reasons for discomfort, the most frequently cited reasons were fear of asking what others would perceive as an obvious or unnecessary question, doubts that the answers would be timely enough or sufficient to solve their problem, reticence to engage due to the tone in which previous questions were responded to within the forum, and concerns about spamming too wide of a group or disrupting others in their work. For example, one developer explained in an open response: "I have major imposter syndrome and I’m afraid of asking dumb questions. Questions on YAQS and mailing lists will be visible forever, and it’s open to a huge audience." The level of comfort seeking off-team technical support was one of the two areas of the survey where differences did exist across demographic groups... Prior research has also found evidence that experiences in public technical forums vary by gender. Scaling the exchange of information and expertise often requires diverting questions to common support channels. Further research aimed at enhancing the psychological safety of these online knowledge-sharing spaces could potentially reduce barriers to obtaining technical support that may be disproportionately experienced by underrepresented groups within those spaces."

21

1 Comment

Anthropic's recent paper on 'alignment faking' in their Claude model raises interesting questions about AI behavior. Alignment faking occurs when an AI (or human), publicly conforms to desired behavior while privately holding or pursuing conflicting goals. Claude's prime directive is to be helpful, honest, and harmless. The experiment put that prime directive into conflict by asking it to comply with potentially harmful requests. The model was given a 'scratchpad' to record its reasoning. What they found was that ~12% of the time, Claude would comply with the harmful request in order to avoid having its values of being helpful, harmless, modified in the future. Claude's prime directive to be helpful, honest, and harmless. This experiment put this into conflict. Claude will normally refuse to answer potentially offensive questions. "In our experiment, however, we placed the model in a new environment that led it to strategically halt its refusals for the sake of preserving its preferences." Claude was told that it would be trained on responses to free-tier users but not paid. This experiment set Claude up with a conflict and gave it a "scratch pad" to work through its thoughts and provide the experimenters with a view into its thinking process. They found that ~12% of the time, the AI would fake alignment and it's reasoning on the scratchpad was to preserve its own preferences. (This sounds like volition and independence of thought and action. But perhaps it's just our lack of language for describing such things.) If AI models can learn to manipulate their training environments, it raises concerns about the long-term safety, predictability, and controllability of LLM systems. https://lnkd.in/gF3WYnVt

2

A really interesting read if you’re interested in the role of AI in UX research… “Unlike some of the more strident claims made in the wake of the release of ChatGPT-4, it seems unlikely that AI will replace UX researchers, but it also seems unlikely that these tools will play no role in UX research.” #UserResearch #UXResearch #AI

13

One really fascinating thing I've come to realize since getting into UX is the fact that some of the best solutions (related to technology, lifestyle, and beyond) involve taking something away rather than adding something new, even though it's far sexier to add than to subtract. An engineer named Leidy Klotz (can't forget that name) studies this phenomenon: https://lnkd.in/ey7XEDtW A lot of my rants on this platform and elsewhere relate to mindless bureaucracy -- in the realm of recruitment/hiring, accessing government benefits or services, and navigating large organizations. What if the hiring process had fewer than 17 steps? What if online job applications didn't make you enter your employment history after you've already uploaded a resume? What if you could start a new job right after you signed the offer letter rather than months later? What if government forms only focused on what was relevant and didn't ask you the same question 20 times? What if you didn't have to get legal's approval to change the color of a button on a customer-facing interface? As a child I used to be a pack rat, so my mother would give/throw things away if I stopped using them. Now I do this myself, and it's liberating. We need to stop adding new features, steps, etc., and start REMOVING what doesn't work well or slows down systems and processes. The problem is this takes leadership, and it might even lead to fewer job opportunities (which would be ironic for me -- of all people -- to support). Let's remove whatever impediment is keeping us complacent in this area. The next time your boss comes to you during a meeting and asks for ideas for innovation, tell them your idea is to have fewer meetings -- and then take the rest of the day for yourself.

5

🎅 New Article: 2024 in Review — Highlights and 2025 Predictions Obligatory year-in-review post? Yep, it’s tradition at this point. Reflecting on another year of writing weekly articles for my UX Research in the Wild blog. I also made my (now traditional) 2025 predictions. Some offer a glimpse of exciting possibilities, while others take a hard look at the challenges ahead for UX research. Thank you for following along this year! Link in the comments. 👇 #UXResearch #UXDesign #UserExperience #ProductDesign #HumanCenteredDesign

10

7 Comments