Investigating qualitative depth of AI-moderated interviews
Summary
When research teams are small, the hardest tradeoff is often between depth and scale. Live interviews surface rich, contextual insights, but they’re also time-consuming, resource-heavy, thus often deprioritized when bandwidth is low. In this session, I’ll share how I experimented with AI-moderated interviews to bridge that gap, using technology to recover depth and empathy without requiring live facilitation. Faced with the need to understand our customers’ decision-making (those who purchased our platform, and those who didn’t), I initially relied on surveys. However, I found they lacked the nuance that real conversations reveal. By introducing AI moderation, I created a way for participants to engage in adaptive, conversational interviews that went beyond the limits of static forms. I’ll walk through how I set up these sessions, what prompts worked (and didn’t), and how I analyzed the results. I’ll also share how I’ve used other AI tools like ChatGPT and Perplexity to assist with synthesis and bias-checking, creating a workflow that both expands my analytical reach and strengthens the rigor of my findings. As AI tools continue to enter the researcher’s toolkit, this case study illustrates how we can thoughtfully integrate them to expand—not erode—the human depth of qualitative work. It offers a model for how lean teams can maintain research quality while navigating the realities of limited time, budget, and capacity. This talk will explore the emerging space between automation and augmentation, finding opportunity for depth when time and resources are tight.”
Key Insights
-
•
AI moderation enables more qualitative depth than surveys due to participants speaking freely rather than typing.
-
•
AI moderation platforms require detailed and explicit research plans to guide effective questioning.
-
•
AI moderation often struggles with natural conversational flow and can produce awkward pauses or interruptions.
-
•
Follow-up questions from AI moderators can be vague, repetitive, or miss opportunities to dive deeper.
-
•
AI moderation is best suited for validation or deepening understanding of known problem spaces, not foundational discovery.
-
•
Participants may prefer AI moderation over surveys due to ease and flexibility, supporting higher and quicker recruitment.
-
•
AI moderation platforms currently do not replace human analysis or provide strong quantitative outputs.
-
•
High emotion or sensitive topics may work better with AI moderation if participants prefer anonymity, but human interviews excel at rapport.
-
•
Researchers need to invest time troubleshooting and iterating prompts in AI moderated studies.
-
•
AI moderated studies allow teams of one to scale qualitative research when live interviews are infeasible.
Notable Quotes
"Having one-on-calls with people is one of my favorite parts of conducting research, and it felt like this was being taken away from me just for the sake of saving business resources."
"AI moderation, in short, is a large language model that runs a moderated interview session without a human researcher present."
"I was interested in thinking of this method as a survey plus that you can use to get survey-like data but with more qualitative depth."
"When I gave the model my list of interview questions, it actually made for a really bizarre participant experience because the model just went down the line of the different questions."
"People were more likely to explain their thought process and just more context around the particular situation of their org."
"There were moments like long kind of awkward pauses where the model was processing, and sometimes it actually spoke over participants."
"Follow-up questions missed opportunities to probe deeper or were confusing, and participants had to repeat themselves."
"If I really just needed only quantitative data from a survey, then I would not go the AI moderated route."
"AI moderation did not make the research easier. It made it possible under real world constraints."
"From setup to analysis, AI moderation still requires a good understanding of what quality research looks like and how to interpret qualitative data."
Or choose a question:
More Videos
"Increasing page load time by three seconds can nullify all your design improvements."
Erin WeigelUX Lessons from running more than 1,200 A/B Tests
July 10, 2024
"Safe money has solid returns, so fiscally responsible companies demand higher returns from new investments especially with inflation."
Mike OrenWhy Pharmaceutical's Research Model Should Replace Design Thinking
March 28, 2023
"Now everyone’s an edge case, so research needs to focus on those edge cases, not just the average user."
Lija Hogan Milan Mijatovic Sam Proulx Louis RosenfeldThree Years Out: Perspectives on the Near-Term Future of User Research
March 15, 2024
"If Charlie has been tampered with, Alice needs a clear way to be alerted that she shouldn't trust it."
Heidi TrostWhen AI Becomes the User’s Point Person—and Point of Failure
August 7, 2025
"None of this matters without outcomes; we design to make people’s days better, not just to design."
Adam CutlerPeople + Places + Practices = Outcomes
June 8, 2016
"Technophobia is an irrational fear and unease towards modern technology."
Rittika BasuAge and Interfaces: Equipping Older Adults with Technological Tools
February 23, 2023
"One superpower of ops humans is making problems and gaps visible to build awareness and drive change."
Saara Kamppari-MillerDesignOps for Inclusive Design and Accessibility
May 26, 2022
"This day is focused on me, my job and my specific day-to-day challenges, not on some invisible finish line or senior title."
Bria AlexanderTheme Two Intro
October 3, 2023
"Design Ops teams exist in nearly all industries and for all design functions, growing rapidly year over year."
Laine Riley Prokay Lisa GordonCarving a Path for Early Career DesignOps Practitioners
September 9, 2022
