UX Research Frameworks

Purpose: A three-move framework for when you are on top of tasks and want to use surplus time productively.

Step 1. Pause and Scan

Before acting, ask yourself:

• What’s pressing but not urgent?
• What’s invisible but would help others if surfaced?
• What’s unfinished but hidden under “done”?

Summary: scanning gives you a map of real options instead of defaulting to activity.

Step 2. Choose a Move

• Broaden: Extend your reach by sharing, mentoring, or documenting.
• Deepen: Analyse your own process, capture lessons, refine patterns.
• Prepare: Plant seeds for later, draft outlines, clear backlogs, explore tools.

Summary: productivity comes from committing to one direction, not scattering energy.

Step 3. Close the Loop

End with a visible artefact:

• A short note or learning log
• A quick sketch of a process
• A draft template or outline
• A conversation summary shared with the team

Summary: closing the loop turns surplus time into cumulative value.

Purpose: A framework to balance quantitative, qualitative, and observational evidence, preventing premature certainty.

Step 1. Map What You Have

List your current sources:

• Quantitative: analytics, funnel data, error logs
• Qualitative: interviews, surveys, diary studies
• Observational: usability sessions, shadowing, field notes

Summary: the act of mapping shows imbalance before it distorts decisions.

Step 2. Surface the Why and the Where

• Numbers show where behaviour happens (drop-offs, clicks, timings)
• Interviews suggest why behaviour happens (motives, frustrations)
• Observations reveal how behaviour unfolds (gestures, pauses, workarounds)

Summary: triangulation is not about agreement but productive friction.

Step 3. Decide What’s Missing

Ask:

• Which perspective is absent?
• Do we need a quick test, a log review, or more context from users?
• Is the gap large enough to delay decisions, or small enough to flag as a limitation?

Summary: triangulation is less about certainty, more about noticing absence.

Purpose: To guide stakeholder conversations without collapsing them into requirements too quickly.

Step 1. Attend Before Extracting

Listen for:

• Key words or metaphors they repeat
• Tone shifts (hesitation, frustration, pride)
• What they do not mention, despite importance

Summary: attending widens the frame of what counts as input.

Step 2. Translate into Layers

Sort what you hear into three categories:

• Strategic concerns (vision, positioning, long-term value)
• Operational needs (timelines, deliverables, team constraints)
• Personal concerns (fears, frustrations, past experiences)

Summary: translation prevents all input being flattened into “requirements.”

Step 3. Reflect Back

Techniques to confirm understanding:

• Paraphrase: “So what I hear is X…”
• Contrast: “It sounds like trust matters more than speed — is that right?”
• Invite correction: “Have I missed anything important?”

Summary: reflecting back slows the rush to action and builds shared meaning.

Purpose: A framework for noticing what is missing in research data, not only what is present.

Step 1. Look at Absence

Review your data and ask:

• Who is not represented in this sample?
• What questions were never asked?
• Which touchpoints leave no trace in our logs?

Summary: absence is data, not a void.

Step 2. Ask Why Silence Holds

Possible reasons for gaps:

• Method discourages disclosure (e.g. surveys with closed questions)
• System excludes certain users (e.g. accessibility barriers)
• Cultural reasons (taboo topics, status dynamics)

Summary: silence often reflects structure, not coincidence.

Step 3. Choose an Intervention

Options include:

• Run additional research to fill the gap
• Note the absence explicitly in reporting
• Treat silence itself as a finding

Summary: not every gap must be closed, but each must be acknowledged.

Purpose: To use heuristics as prompts without letting them narrow interpretation.

Step 1. Apply the Checklist

Run through Jakob Nielsen’s ten usability heuristics:

1. Visibility of system status
2. Match between system and the real world
3. User control and freedom
4. Consistency and standards
5. Error prevention
6. Recognition rather than recall
7. Flexibility and efficiency of use
8. Aesthetic and minimalist design
9. Help users recognise, diagnose, and recover from errors
10. Help and documentation

Summary: the checklist surfaces quick wins but is only the start.

Step 2. Ask What the Heuristic Misses

Questions to ask:

• If it failed, why did the design pass earlier reviews?
• If it passed, why do users still feel uneasy?
• What team or cultural practices led to this design?

Summary: gaps between heuristic and reality reveal culture and process, not just interface.

Step 3. Expand the Frame

Combine heuristic results with other evidence:

• Pair with interview data for emotional reactions
• Add contextual inquiry for real-world behaviour
• Use analytics to check if the issue scales

Summary: heuristics work best when they remain porous to other evidence.

Purpose: To bring ethnographic habits into applied UX research without overstating their reach.

Step 1. Enter with Curiosity

Observe as if it were a culture:

• What rituals or repeated behaviours appear?
• What language, slang, or jargon is used?
• What workarounds emerge under constraint?

Summary: curiosity prevents assumptions from leading the encounter.

Step 2. Hold Description Before Interpretation

Practices to slow down:

• Write verbatim quotes before paraphrasing
• Note physical actions before judging intent
• Separate observation logs from early insights

Summary: description slows the rush to fit behaviour into categories.

Step 3. Frame as Partial View

In reporting, make limits explicit:

• “In this context…”
• “With these people…”
• “Here is what was seen…”

Summary: ethnographic insight is rich precisely because it is partial.