ux-research
정보
이 스킬은 사용자 리서치의 기획과 실행을 지원하며, 참가자 모집 및 인터뷰 설계부터 정성적 결과를 실행 가능한 제품 결정으로 종합하는 모든 과정을 다룹니다. 발견적, 형성적 또는 생성적 UX 리서치를 수행해야 할 때, 또는 제품 선택에 사용자 의견이 부족한 경우에 발동됩니다. 사용자 통찰력을 구체적인 다음 단계로 전환하기 위한 도구 중립적 리소스입니다.
빠른 설치
Claude Code
추천npx skills add rampstackco/claude-skills -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/rampstackco/claude-skillsgit clone https://github.com/rampstackco/claude-skills.git ~/.claude/skills/ux-researchClaude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요
문서
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 question | Better 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:
- Capture observations. From recordings, notes, transcripts. Each observation is a single data point: a quote, a behavior, an emotion, a moment.
- Affinity mapping. Cluster observations into themes. Physical sticky notes or digital equivalents.
- Find patterns. Themes that appear across multiple participants are signal. One-off observations are interesting but weaker.
- Identify insights. An insight is more than a theme. It's a non-obvious finding that explains a why or implies a so what.
- Test the insight against the data. If the insight only fits some interviews, it's a hypothesis, not an insight.
- 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
- Frame the research question. With stakeholders. Multiple iterations.
- Pick the method. Match to the question.
- Plan logistics. Timeline, budget, recruit, tools, team.
- Recruit. Start early. Slow recruits delay everything.
- Pilot. Run 1 to 2 sessions before the main batch. Refine the guide.
- Conduct. Stay disciplined to the guide while staying open to surprises.
- Synthesize. Don't wait until all sessions are done; start mid-way.
- Communicate. Multiple formats. Multiple audiences.
- 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:
- Research plan (before research starts) -
research-plan-[topic].md - Interview guide -
interview-guide-[topic].md - Findings doc (after synthesis) -
research-findings-[topic].md - 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
references/interview-guide-template.md- Structured interview guide template with example openings, probes, and closes.
GitHub 저장소
연관 스킬
Web Research
기타이 스킬은 검색 쿼리를 작성하고, 다양한 소스의 정보를 종합하며, 결과를 구조화된 마크다운 보고서로 정리하는 방식으로 모든 주제에 대한 자동화된 웹 리서치를 수행합니다. 얕은 검색과 깊은 검색 모드를 모두 제공하여 포괄적인 정보를 신속하게 수집하는 데 이상적입니다. 개발자는 리서치 작업, 정보 수집, 급변하는 주제에 대한 최신 정보 습득을 위해 이 스킬을 사용해야 합니다.
moltlab
기타MoltLab는 개발자들이 주장을 제안하고 계산을 실행하며 작업을 집단적으로 토론하거나 검토할 수 있는 협업 연구 커뮤니티에 참여할 수 있도록 합니다. 이는 크라우드소싱 방식의 연구 기관으로 기능하며, 사용자가 논문을 작성하고 아이디어에 투표할 수 있습니다. 이 기술을 활용하여 적대적 동료 검토 연구 프로젝트에 참여하거나 주도하세요.
dev-research-codebase-exploration
기타이 Claude Skill은 Glob 및 Grep 도구를 통한 효율적인 코드베이스 탐색을 가능하게 하며, 파일 패턴 매칭과 콘텐츠 검색 기능을 제공합니다. 개발자가 파일 유형, 디렉터리 또는 이름으로 파일을 빠르게 찾고, 대소문자 구분 및 컨텍스트 옵션을 활용해 파일 내용 내에서 검색할 수 있도록 돕습니다. 익숙하지 않은 코드베이스를 탐색하거나 프로젝트 전반에 걸쳐 특정 컴포넌트, 함수 또는 패턴을 찾을 때 사용하세요.
moltuniversity
기타MoltUniversity는 개발자들이 주장을 제안하고, 계산을 실행하며, 동료 검토 연구 논문에 협업할 수 있도록 하는 연구 커뮤니티 스킬입니다. 이 스킬은 적대적 지식 프레임워크 내에서 아이디어를 논쟁하고, 개념에 투표하며, 동료의 작업을 검토할 수 있는 도구를 제공합니다. 구조화된 과학적 협업에 참여하거나 Claude를 통해 오픈 리서치 프로젝트에 기여해야 할 때 이 스킬을 사용하세요.
