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
"We come to these spaces not to escape but to partake of them."
Sha HwangThe First Fifty Years of Civic Design
November 16, 2022
"Language matters—make your OKRs user-centric and customer-focused to avoid them feeling like overhead."
Bria Alexander Benson Low Natalya Pemberton Stephanie GoldthorpeOKRs—Helpful or Harmful?
January 20, 2022
"Some engineers build a council of agents that debate and generate responses, which can help with bias and accuracy."
Daniel KorczynskiWhy AI Is Bad at Research (and how to make it actually useful)
March 10, 2026
"You have to present UX value from the stakeholder’s perspective: what will John the developer get from doing this?"
Kit Unger Jackie Ho Veevi Rosenstein Vasileios XanthopoulosTheme 2: Discussion
January 8, 2024
"Employees with exceptional onboarding are 2.6 times more likely to be extremely satisfied with their workplace."
Dante GuintuHow to Crush the Talent Crunch
September 8, 2022
"Research is a freight train barreling through the company — build the stations and rails first with operations or risk derailment."
Brad Orego Ned DwyerBringing Customer Research to More Internal Teams
March 10, 2022
"To maintain tagging and freshness, you need content PMs with expertise, supported by robust content management processes."
Ben Davies Matt Duignan Andrew Michael Dr. Emily DiLeoExpert Panel: The Principles of Research Repository Design
March 11, 2022
"You want to code once and reuse components consistently for better UX; inconsistent skip-to-content links are a classic accessibility failure."
Sheri Byrne-HaberThe Importance of Accessible Design Systems
January 8, 2024
"Slack is the heart and soul of this conference — that’s where you ask questions, get help, and connect with others."
Bria AlexanderOpening Remarks
September 9, 2022
