How To Handle Sensitive Topics In User Experience Interviews

People often say what they think they should say. I had a great exchange with 👋 Brandon Spencer, who highlighted the challenges of using qualitative user research. He suggested that qual responses are helpful, but you have to read between the lines more than you do when watching what they do. People often say what they think they should be saying and do what they naturally would. I agree. Based on my digital experiences, there are several reasons for this behavior. People start with what they know or feel, filtered by their long-term memory. Social bias ↳ People often say what they think they should be saying because they want to present themselves positively, especially in social or evaluative situations. Jakob's Law ↳ Users spend most of their time on other sites, meaning they speak to your site/app like the sites they already know. Resolving these issues in UX research requires a multi-faceted approach that considers what users say (user wants) and what they do (user needs) while accounting for biases and user expectations. Here’s how we tackle these issues: 1. Combine qualitative and quantitative research We use Helio to pull qualitative insights to understand the "why" behind user behavior but validate these insights with quantitative data (e.g., structured behavioral questions). This helps to balance what users say with what they do. 2. Test baselines with your competitors Compare your design with common patterns with which users are familiar. Knowing this information reduces cognitive load and makes it easier for users to interact naturally with your site on common tasks. 3. Allow anonymity  Allow users to provide feedback anonymously to reduce the pressure to present themselves positively. Helio automatically does this while still creating targeted audiences. We also don’t do video. This can lead to more honest and authentic responses. 4. Neutral questioning We frame questions to reduce the likelihood of leading or socially desirable answers. For example, ask open-ended questions that don’t imply a “right” answer. 5. Natural settings Engage with users in their natural environment and devices to observe their real behavior and reduce the influence of social bias. Helio is a remote platform, so people can respond wherever they want. The last thing we have found is that by asking more in-depth questions and increasing participants, you can gain stronger insights by cross-referencing data. → Deeper: When users give expected or socially desirable answers, ask follow-up questions to explore their true thoughts and behaviors. → Wider: Expand your sample size (we test with 100 participants) and keep testing regularly. We gather 10,000 customer answers each month, which helps create a broader and more reliable data set. Achieving a more accurate and complete understanding of user behavior is possible, leading to better design decisions. #productdesign #productdiscovery #userresearch #uxresearch

Think you're researching a "neutral" product? You're not. By "neutral product," I mean: 👉 The user experience of this product isn't affected by systems of oppression like ableism, classism, racism, colorism, sexism, ethnocentrism, queerphobia, ageism, etc. 👉 Your perception of this product and its users isn't influenced by your beliefs, biases, identities, and background (all shaped by those pesky systems of oppression). I promise it doesn't exist. If we think our product is "neutral," we run the risk of being unaware of our biases that affect our #UXResearch and the insights we pass on to product teams. At best, this could lead to us overlooking or misinterpreting user needs or, at worst, doing real harm to users. 2 ways the seemingly "neutral" products I study aren't "neutral" at all: I currently study cloud-based productivity tools. I hear stories all the time about how email and time/task management apps work well or don't work well for different users. 🧠 🧠 🧠 A big factor in users' experience with these tools is ✨ neurospiciness ✨ (more formally called neurodivergence). A simple example: Push notifications might work really well to keep Alex, a neurotypical user, on track in their work day but might be detrimentally distracting to Jose who has ADHD. Neurodivergence also affects how participants show up in user interviews. For example, lots of neurodivergent people experience internalized ableism (when a person with a disability adopts society's negative beliefs and values about disability, and applies them to themselves). This can show up as thoughts like "I'm lazy bc I can't organize my schedule like my colleagues" or "I'm stupid for not understanding what to do next." These feelings of shame sure as he🏒🏒 show up in user interviews. It's my job as a UXR studying these tools to design my interviews and any materials I use in interviews work for various ability levels AND to respond in anti-ableist ways when participants express these feelings. 🎂 🎂 🎂 Older adults are often stereotyped as having less technological ability than younger users. As UXRs, carrying this stereotypical assumption with us when we go into an interview with an older adult can lead to us being more likely to write-off their feedback or attribute any usability issues to age alone. This doesn't align with our role as user advocates. It's worth asking yourself: When I'm interviewing users and putting together my final report, whose feedback am I most likely to write-off or deem as unimportant? We don't have to beat ourselves up about this. The goal is to learn, unlearn, increase self-awareness, and take action accordingly. We didn't ask to be taught to think this way, we all grew up breathing in the poisonous messages systems of oppression taught us, and we can work to unlearn them. ❓ Try me, is there a product you think might be truly "neutral" as I described above? ❓ What are ways you see the product you study not being "neutral"?

Something I like to request before facilitating thorny #UserResearch discussions is “ask questions with care and offer answers with generosity.” When I started doing equity work, I was often recommended to facilitate with a good question but it took me some time to figure out what that means because, personally, I was never taught what makes a good question! As I’ve gained more experience, I’ve settled on a few principles, including: For the askers: 1️⃣ Stop phrasing questions like there is one true answer (your preferred answer)—your assumptions and interpretations of the world shouldn’t feel obvious or inevitable. Be open to alternative framing. 2️⃣ Contextualize your generalizations: Too often I see people mischaracterize how their discussion partner, field, industry, etc. think when it’s clear the asker has little familiarity (and more importantly practical understanding) of it. Instead, note what motivates your generalization: “I’ve observed Y so assume X. From your experience, what do you think about this? How can I explore this topic/issue/question more?” And for the answerers: 3️⃣ Don’t assume because someone is asking a question that they’re not well-versed or even experts in the topic. Experts ask questions to… ✅ Ask on behalf of someone else who might not be comfortable articulating it ✅ Learn alternative ways of *explaining* something they know ✅ Test out someone’s expertise ✅ And more! 4️⃣ Relatedly, actually answer the question that was asked. Unless a question is so off-base or such a gross mischaracterization that it requires you to take a step back and build towards a better question before even answering...assume folks are knowledgeable enough for directness. Follow-up questions aren't productive if they're not seeking detail or expansion. What are other ways we can improve our questions and answers? #PracticalEthics #TraumaInformed #UXResearch #QualitativeResearch #Design #UXDesign #UX #UserExperience #DesignJustice