Build a useful investigation brief
Choose a revealing contrast
Pair a participant who uses the current workaround with one who does not, or compare two contexts where the predicted behavior differs. Keep the task and prompt stable. Record participant circumstances so a difference is not mistaken for a product effect.
Run the smallest probe
Use a prototype, observation, or interview prompt that exposes the belief without teaching the desired answer. Capture the exact wording, sequence, and participant response. Note hesitation, workarounds, and reasons for rejecting the proposed behavior.
Challenge the explanation
Test whether timing, recruitment, existing habits, or a different unmet need could explain the result. Look for a case that contradicts the pattern. If the evidence supports several explanations, state the next observation needed instead of naming a root cause.
What to carry forward
The investigation brief should contain the assumption, matched cases, probe materials, observations, competing explanations, and an evidence gap. End with a revised belief or a named next test. Do not treat a participant preference or one successful session as proof of future adoption.
Technical background: GOV.UK user 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