Do you mix user research methods to capture the full picture?
Updated by Betty Bondoc [SSW] 12 days ago. See history
Relying on the same user research method like only running 1-on-1 interviews leads to blind spots. Interviews are great for depth, but they don’t reveal group dynamics, cross-team dependencies, or patterns that emerge at scale.
To design experiences that scale, you need insights that are qualitative and quantitative, attitudinal and behavioural, and drawn from both individuals and teams.
Why mix research methods?
As Christian Rohrer from Nielsen Norman Group explains, UX research spans multiple dimensions:
- Attitudinal vs Behavioral – what users say vs what they do
- Qualitative vs Quantitative – why something happens vs how often it happens
- Context of Use – natural use, scripted tasks, or abstracted activities
According to NN/g, no single method will uncover everything. Mixing methods leads to stronger insights and fewer blind spots.
Read the full article: When to Use Which User-Experience Research Methods
Mixing research methods helps you
- Understand both individual workflows and systemic issues
- Avoid designing for edge cases or only the loudest voices
- Uncover hidden workarounds and friction between teams
- Generate more reliable, well-rounded insights
What methods should I combine?
| Method | Use it to |
| 1-on-1 interviews | Explore personal workflows and uncover pain points |
| Group workshops / focus groups | Reveal shared behaviors and team-level challenges |
| Observation / shadowing | Catch things users don’t say (but still do) |
| Surveys | Quantify trends or confirm emerging patterns across users |
You don’t need to use every method on every project, but most projects benefit from using at least two.
Practical example
A UX designer begins by interviewing three Admins to understand how they use the system. Based on those findings, she runs a 60-minute group workshop with Admins and Technicians to map shared issues and uncover workflow gaps between teams.
✅ Figure: Good example – Combines depth from interviews with breadth from group insight
Only interviewing one user and assuming their experience applies to everyone. Skipping group validation and relying on stakeholder assumptions.
❌ Figure: Bad example – Designs based on limited or biased input
Bonus tip: Mix user roles, not just methods
Group sessions are a great way to bring in users from different teams, departments, or levels of experience. Doing so can help you uncover:
- Gaps in communication
- Conflicting priorities
- “Unofficial” workarounds users rely on
These types of issues rarely come up in 1-on-1 interviews alone.