Build a useful investigation brief
Run the first explanation
Give the same concept card, sketch, or short description without adding examples that are not part of the concept. Ask the participant what it means, who it is for, and what they would do next. Record their language verbatim where possible.
Compare interpretations
Group explanations by intended job, expected outcome, concern, and next action. Identify whether a term, promise, or example creates the split. Compare familiar and unfamiliar participants without treating domain expertise as the correct answer.
Test the narrowest change
Change one phrase, example, or concept boundary and repeat the probe. Check whether understanding improves without adding a new promise. Record persistent ambiguity and the context that still needs research.
What to carry forward
The investigation brief should show the presented concept, participant explanations, interpretation groups, changed wording, and unresolved ambiguity. End with a clearer promise or an evidence request. Do not equate positive affect with comprehension or future use.
Technical background: Nielsen Norman Group research guidance.
Keep the decision with the work.
Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.
Create an account See the product workflow