Can you show me how you currently solve this problem?
M
User Research Interview
Interviewer agent · 1.8K uses
For Research Teams
Scale the Interviews. Keep the Depth.
Perspective conducts adaptive interviews with every participant, probes the reasoning behind each answer, and turns hundreds of conversations into evidence your team can inspect.
01Listen
Participants, not a panel of twelve
02Learn
Transcripts become findings
03Prioritize
The finding the decision turns on
04Release
Ship the recommendation
v6.001 · Listen
Field the study without scheduling every session.
- An agent runs the guide, probes every unexpected answer, and never tires on session forty.
- Screen inside the conversation itself, so you are not paying for participants who do not qualify.
- Mandatory questions stay consistent across every session while the follow-up adapts to the person.
- Runs asynchronously across time zones, by link, on your site, or out loud over voice.
Over voice
Spoken answers, with the asides and hesitations a typed reply never has. Transcribed and structured on arrival.
On your page
Triggered at the moment that matters, not weeks later.
In an email
One link, no login, no portal to remember.
Behind a QR code
In person, on print, in the room.
02 · Learn
Get to defensible themes without reading every transcript.
- Each session is summarized, and themes cluster across the study with their supporting quotes attached.
- Trace any finding back to the exact conversations that produced it, which is what makes it defensible.
- Ask questions across the whole study rather than re-reading it once the fieldwork is done.
- Compare themes by segment, recruit source, or wave, so a pattern is not an artifact of who answered.
We already solved this with a spreadsheet, badly.
The person who needs it is not the person who buys it.
I would switch tomorrow if it did the monthly report.
Theme
The buyer and the user are different people
Present in 18 of 24 interviews, and the reason two of the three tested concepts tested badly.
03 · Prioritize
Say which finding the decision turns on.
- Rank findings by how much they would change the decision, not by how many times they came up.
- A stakeholder argues with a percentage. They do not argue with the sentence a customer said.
- Share evidence while the decision is still open rather than after the roadmap locks.
- The same synthesis tells you what is not worth researching again.
Would change the decision
Split buyer and user onboarding64%
Add the monthly report41%
Rework pricing tiers19%
“If you make the admin do the setup, the person who wanted it never sees it work.”
Head of Ops, 400-seat customer
04 · Release
Ship the recommendation, then check whether it held.
- Findings get treated like releases: what was recommended, what shipped, and what changed as a result.
- The next wave tells you whether the recommendation held, which is the part a deck never comes back to.
- Research stops resetting every quarter and starts compounding into shared context.
- Then it runs again, which is the difference between a study and a practice.
Research changelogthis quarter
v6.0
Onboarding split for buyer and end user
Activation up 22%
v5.4
Monthly report shipped to the top two segments
Renewal risk flags down 30%
v5.3
Concept C dropped before build
Two sprints returned to the roadmap
Each wave feeds the next, so the study starts from what you already know rather than from scratch.
Start the loop with your own participants.
Get Started FreeCustomer Momentum
This Is What It Looks Like When Research Compounds.
Four things that move together, because they share one root cause: research that arrives in time to change the decision.
↓
Acquisition cost
Studies that needed a recruiter, a moderator, and six weeks now cost a fraction of that, so more decisions get evidence.
↑
Win rate
Decisions backed by forty interviews instead of a panel of twelve are right more often, and wrong sooner when they are wrong.
↑
Organic and referral
Findings that reached the room on time show up in the work, and the work is what customers recommend.
=
One story
Every team cites the same study rather than the anecdote that best fits the plan they already had.
Start From a Template Built for Research.
Each one arrives with the questions drafted and the follow-up logic already set. Change what you want and put it live.
How do you currently solve this problem in your business?
E
Market Research Interview
Interviewer agent · 1.3K uses
Walk me through what you were doing right before you started using us.
M
Customer Interview
Interviewer agent · 820 uses
How would you feel if you could no longer use this product?
L
Product-Market Fit Survey
Evaluator agent · 1.2K uses
When you think of our brand, what first comes to mind?
O
Brand Perception Survey
Interviewer agent · 1.7K uses
Walk me through how you'd normally do this before we look at the screen.
R
Run a UX Focus Group
Interviewer agent · 1K uses
Related Articles
Methodology, benchmarks, and what changes when the moderator is an agent.
AI Qualitative Research
A practical guide for research teams running studies at scale.
Read article
Customer Interview Benchmark 2026
Response rates, conversation depth, and time to insight, measured.
Read article
Focus Groups vs AI Research
A head-to-head on cost, depth, and decision quality.
Read article
The Research Democratization Report
How non-researchers came to run most studies, and what it changed.
Read article
AI-Moderated Research
How moderation works when the interviewer is an agent.
Read article
500 Hours of AI-Moderated Sessions
What we learned from analyzing 500 hours of interviews.
Read articleFAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Give Research Better Answers, Faster.
Build your first agent in minutes. No credit card required.
No credit card required • Cancel anytime