Comparative Study: Human UX Researcher vs. AI Moderator in UX Research (Case Study)

This case study, conducted by Udy Ravid using Genway’s AI-Moderated Research technology, examines the comparative performance of a Human UX Researcher and an AI Moderator across four critical phases of the UX research process.

The primary objective was to evaluate the effectiveness, efficiency, and quality of outcomes when a human expert (Udy Ravid) and an AI-driven moderator perform the same research tasks. This structured comparison provides insights into how AI can complement — or potentially substitute — certain aspects of human-led research.

The study focused on the following key phases:

1. Recruiting Participants for a Study
Assessment of recruitment speed, targeting accuracy, diversity of participants, and overall fit with research objectives.

2. Setting Up the Study
Evaluation of preparation time, study design clarity, and ability to align research materials with objectives and constraints.

3. Study Execution
Comparison of facilitation style, participant engagement, adaptability during sessions, and quality of data collected.

4. Analysis
Review of depth, accuracy, and actionable quality of insights, as well as time to complete analysis and deliver findings.

By examining each of these stages side-by-side, the study delivers a data-backed perspective on the strengths, limitations, and optimal use cases for both human and AI-led moderation in UX research. The findings are intended to guide UX teams, product managers, and researchers in making informed decisions about integrating AI into their research workflows.

#uxresearch #marketresearch #AImoderator #uxcasestudy #GenwayAI