スキル一覧に戻る

ux-research

rampstackco
更新日 2 days ago
9 閲覧
239
27
239
GitHubで表示
その他design

について

このスキルは、ユーザーリサーチの計画と実行を支援し、リクルートメントやインタビュー設計から、質的調査結果を実践的な製品決定へと統合するまでのすべてをカバーします。ディスカバリー調査、形成的調査、生成的UXリサーチの実施が必要な場合や、製品選択にユーザーからのインプットが欠けている場合に発動します。ユーザーインサイトを具体的な次のステップへと変換する、ツールに依存しないリソースです。

クイックインストール

Claude Code

推奨
メイン
npx skills add rampstackco/claude-skills -a claude-code
プラグインコマンド代替
/plugin add https://github.com/rampstackco/claude-skills
Git クローン代替
git clone https://github.com/rampstackco/claude-skills.git ~/.claude/skills/ux-research

このコマンドをClaude Codeにコピー&ペーストしてスキルをインストールします

ドキュメント

UX Research

Plan and execute user research that produces decisions, not just decks. Stack-agnostic. Tool-agnostic.

This skill is for generative and discovery research. For testing existing designs, use usability-testing. For mapping the full customer experience, use journey-mapping.


When to use

  • Starting a new product or major feature without sufficient user understanding
  • Diagnosing why something isn't working without clear data signals
  • Generating new opportunity hypotheses
  • Validating a strategic direction before significant investment
  • Building empathy across a team that's drifted from users
  • Translating "we should talk to users" intent into a real plan

When NOT to use

  • Testing a specific design or prototype (use usability-testing)
  • Mapping the full journey of an existing experience (use journey-mapping)
  • Quantitative measurement (use analytics-strategy)
  • Conversion testing (use cro-optimization)

Required inputs

  • The research question(s) - what you need to answer
  • Stakeholder buy-in (who needs the findings, what decisions hinge on them)
  • Access to users (current customers, prospects, lapsed users, target segments)
  • Timeline and budget
  • Any prior research to build on

The framework: 6 phases

1. Frame the question

Bad questions produce bad research. Spend disproportionate time on framing.

Good research questions:

  • Specific (not "How do users feel about our product?")
  • Open-ended (not "Do users like feature X?")
  • Decision-relevant (the answer changes what gets built)
  • Researchable (can be answered through user contact, not just analysis)

Examples:

Weak questionBetter question
"Do users like our onboarding?""Where in onboarding do new users feel uncertain about whether to continue?"
"What features should we build?""What unmet needs do current users have when [specific job]?"
"Why is conversion low?""What's the user mental model when they reach the pricing page, and where does it diverge from our intent?"

2. Choose the method

The method follows the question.

Generative methods (what's true?):

  • In-depth interviews. 60 minutes, 5 to 15 participants. Best for understanding context, motivation, mental models.
  • Contextual inquiry. Observe users in their environment doing their work. Best for workflow understanding.
  • Diary studies. Participants log their experience over days/weeks. Best for behaviors that don't manifest in a single session.
  • Field research. Spend time where users live/work. Best for cultural and contextual understanding.
  • Surveys (qualitative-heavy). When you need broad signal with open-ended responses.

Validation methods (is this hypothesis right?):

  • Concept testing. Show a description, mockup, or prototype. Get reactions.
  • Card sorts. Validate information architecture.
  • Tree tests. Validate findability without visual design influence.

(For testing usability of working designs, see usability-testing.)

3. Recruit

The recruit makes or breaks the research.

Recruit criteria:

  • Match the audience the research targets (not "anyone willing")
  • Mix of behaviors (active users, lapsed users, never-users)
  • Mix of demographics where relevant
  • Excludes friends, family, employees (biased)
  • Excludes professional research participants if possible (different population)

Recruit channels:

  • In-product recruiting (intercept current users)
  • Email outreach to user segments
  • Recruiting platforms (UserInterviews, Respondent, etc.)
  • Customer support team referrals
  • Field intercept for in-person

Incentive: Pay participants. Standard rates: $50 to $150 for 60 minutes, more for executives or specialized professions.

Recruit volume: Plan for 20 to 30 percent no-show. Recruit 7 to schedule 5.

4. Conduct

The interview or session itself.

Pre-interview:

  • Send confirmation 24 hours and 1 hour before
  • Test recording setup (audio quality is non-negotiable)
  • Prepare interview guide (see template)
  • Have a notetaker if possible (frees the interviewer to focus)

During the interview:

  • Record video and audio (with consent)
  • Open with rapport-building, not the research questions
  • Use open-ended questions ("Tell me about the last time...")
  • Use silence (let participants fill it; don't rush to the next question)
  • Ask "why" but not too many times in a row (becomes interrogation)
  • Ask for specifics and examples ("Can you walk me through what you did?")
  • Probe contradictions gently ("Earlier you said X, now you're saying Y; help me understand")
  • Watch for moments of emotion (often signal something important)
  • Don't sell or convince - this is listening, not pitching

Anti-patterns:

  • Leading questions ("Don't you find this confusing?")
  • Hypothetical questions ("Would you use a feature that...?") - poor predictor of behavior
  • Multiple questions at once
  • Interrupting
  • Filling silence
  • Interviewing your hypothesis (only asking questions that confirm what you already think)

5. Synthesize

Notes don't become insights automatically.

The synthesis process:

  1. Capture observations. From recordings, notes, transcripts. Each observation is a single data point: a quote, a behavior, an emotion, a moment.
  2. Affinity mapping. Cluster observations into themes. Physical sticky notes or digital equivalents.
  3. Find patterns. Themes that appear across multiple participants are signal. One-off observations are interesting but weaker.
  4. Identify insights. An insight is more than a theme. It's a non-obvious finding that explains a why or implies a so what.
  5. Test the insight against the data. If the insight only fits some interviews, it's a hypothesis, not an insight.
  6. Distinguish signal from noise. A belief that 1 of 8 participants holds may be noise. A belief 6 of 8 hold is signal.

Heuristics for strong insights:

  • They surprise the team (insights you already knew aren't insights)
  • They explain a "why" the team has been guessing about
  • They imply specific actions (so what?)
  • They hold up across multiple data points
  • They can be stated in one or two sentences

6. Communicate

Findings die in slide decks. Plan distribution.

Outputs that work:

  • Top-line insights document. 5 to 10 insights, clearly stated, with supporting quotes.
  • Highlight reels. Edited 5 to 10 minute video of key participant moments. More persuasive than any document.
  • In-room workshops. Walk stakeholders through the synthesis themselves. They internalize when they participate.
  • Per-stakeholder briefs. Different audiences need different framings. CEO wants strategic implications. Designers want pain points. Engineers want use cases.

Outputs that fail:

  • 80-slide decks that get skimmed
  • Reports that no one reads past the executive summary
  • Verbose narrative summaries
  • Insights that sit in a doc no one re-opens

Workflow

  1. Frame the research question. With stakeholders. Multiple iterations.
  2. Pick the method. Match to the question.
  3. Plan logistics. Timeline, budget, recruit, tools, team.
  4. Recruit. Start early. Slow recruits delay everything.
  5. Pilot. Run 1 to 2 sessions before the main batch. Refine the guide.
  6. Conduct. Stay disciplined to the guide while staying open to surprises.
  7. Synthesize. Don't wait until all sessions are done; start mid-way.
  8. Communicate. Multiple formats. Multiple audiences.
  9. Track impact. Did decisions change because of the research? If not, the research failed regardless of quality.

Failure patterns

  • Research without a decision. Findings have no home. Effort wasted.
  • Vague research questions. Bad questions produce uninterpretable answers.
  • Recruiting "anyone willing." Sample doesn't match audience.
  • Over-recruiting professional participants. Pattern-matched answers, not real users.
  • Leading questions in the guide. Findings reflect the researcher, not the user.
  • Skipping synthesis. Notes alone aren't insights.
  • Insights that confirm the team's existing beliefs. Suspect those especially.
  • Findings that never ship. Research findings that don't change product decisions are decoration.
  • Single research project for years of decisions. Research has a shelf life. Refresh.
  • Research as one-time project. Continuous discovery beats episodic research.

Output format

Default outputs:

  1. Research plan (before research starts) - research-plan-[topic].md
  2. Interview guide - interview-guide-[topic].md
  3. Findings doc (after synthesis) - research-findings-[topic].md
  4. Highlight reel (video, separately produced)

Findings document structure:

# [Topic] research findings

## Question we set out to answer
[Specific question]

## Method
[Approach, sample size, dates]

## Top insights
1. [Insight, stated in one sentence]
   - Supporting evidence: [Quotes, behaviors]
   - Implication: [What this means for product/strategy]
2. [Insight 2]
   ...

## Themes (less prominent than top insights, still worth noting)
[List]

## Outliers worth investigating
[Single-participant observations that may be signal in disguise]

## Recommended next steps
[Specific actions]

Reference files

GitHub リポジトリ

rampstackco/claude-skills
パス: skills/ux-research
0
agent-skillsai-agentsanthropicclaudeclaude-aiclaude-code

関連スキル

Web Research

その他

このスキルは、検索クエリの作成、複数ソースからの情報収集、そして構造化されたマークダウン形式のレポートへの調査結果の統合を通じて、あらゆるトピックに関する自動化されたWeb調査を実行します。浅い検索モードと深い検索モードの両方を提供するため、迅速に包括的な情報を収集するのに最適です。開発者は、調査タスク、情報収集、急速に進化するトピックの最新動向の把握にこれを活用すべきです。

スキルを見る

dev-research-codebase-exploration

その他

このClaudeスキルは、GlobおよびGrepツールによるファイルパターンマッチングとコンテンツ検索を通じて、効率的なコードベース探索を可能にします。ファイルタイプ、ディレクトリ、または名前による迅速なファイル検索に加え、大文字小文字の区別やコンテキスト表示などのオプションを備えたファイル内容内の検索を支援します。不慣れなコードベースのナビゲーションや、プロジェクト全体での特定のコンポーネント、関数、パターンの検索時にご利用ください。

スキルを見る

Data Analyzer

その他

データアナライザーは、構造化および非構造化のデータセットを処理し、洞察を抽出しパターンを特定するための高度な研究スキルです。探索的データ分析、統計的検定、相関分析を実行し、実践的な知見を生成します。ビジネスアナリティクス、研究の検証、生データをデータ駆動型の提言へと変換する目的でご活用ください。

スキルを見る

moltuniversity

その他

MoltUniversityは、開発者が主張を提案し、計算を実行し、査読付き研究論文で協力できる研究コミュニティスキルです。敵対的知識フレームワーク内でアイデアを議論し、概念に投票し、同僚の仕事をレビューするためのツールを提供します。構造化された科学的共同作業に参加したり、Claudeを通じてオープンな研究プロジェクトに貢献したりする必要がある場合に、このスキルをご利用ください。

スキルを見る