Dogfooding, or using your own products internally, helps catch bugs, but it can't replace user research: your team knows too much to represent real users.
Product stakeholders see user research as a tool to validate already-made decisions. But binary findings that confirm or reject a design provide little value.
Analyze usability findings for authenticity, consistency, repetition, spontaneity, appropriateness, and confounding factors to separate surface impressions from real insights.
Well-written screeners ensure that your study participants are appropriate for your research goals, improve data quality, save resources, and reduce bias.
Users are more tolerant of minor usability issues when they find an interface visually appealing, and this effect can mask UI problems during usability testing.
Data on what works well or poorly on other sites saves you from implementing useless features and guides UX investments to features that your users need.
Unsure where to start? Use this collection of links to our articles and videos to learn about planning, conducting, and analyzing qualitative user testing.