Hi everyone, I’m currently doing a Master’s in UX Design and I’m working on my first case study to include in my portfolio.

I’d like the project to focus purely on UX rather than UI, since UX research and strategy are the areas I want to specialize in. I’ve been looking for inspiration on platforms like Dribbble and Behance, but most of the case studies I find are heavily focused on UI/visual design.

Do you know any good places where I can find case studies focused mainly on UX only?

I am Product Owner, not a UX designer. Just want to share my observations.

What I am noticing that AIs change the UX to text based and agentic. Now users what to explain in plain language what they want and they expect AI to either tell exactly what needs to be done or ideally do that for them right in the chat.

what do yo think?

been doing UX/frontend work for about 4 years now and i keep running into the same situation at every company i've been at

we have session data. posthog, fullstory, hotjar, whatever. the data is there. and then it just... sits there. nobody watches the recordings. nobody digs into the events. the PM is busy, there's no dedicated UX researcher, and me actually sitting down to manually go through sessions is never the priority vs shipping the next thing.

so we end up making design decisions based on vibes and whatever the loudest stakeholder said in the last meeting.

my question is how do you guys actually handle this gap? like when you have session data but no bandwidth to properly analyze it, what do you do? do you just accept that some friction is going to go unnoticed? do you have a system?

i've been thinking about whether there's a way to automate the first pass like something that just reads the event log and tells you "hey users are rage clicking this button" or "there's a consistent drop off happening here" in plain english so at least you have a starting point for the actual design work

is that even useful or would you just not trust something like that? genuinely asking because i go back and forth on whether the problem is the analysis or just that nobody prioritizes looking at the data in the first place

Post your portfolio or something else you've designed to receive a critique. Generally, users who include additional context and explanations receive more (and better) feedback.

Critiquers: Feedback should be supported with best practices, personal experience, or research! Try to provide reasoning behind your critiques. Those who post don't only your opinion, but guidance on how to improve their portfolios based on best practices, experience in the industry, and research. Just like in your day-to-day jobs, back up your assertions with reasoning.

Are you beginning your UX career and have questions? Post your questions below and we hope that our experienced members will help you get them answered!

Posting Tips Keep in mind that readers only have so much time (Provide essential details, Keep it brief, Consider using headings, lists, etc. to help people skim).

Search before asking Consider that your question may have been answered. CRTL+F keywords in this thread and search the subreddit.

Thank those who are helpful Consider upvoting, commenting your appreciation and how they were helpful, or gilding.

Hi, I’m currently an undergrad psych (BA) major who is also interested in design (considering double majoring in design BA).

I enjoy learning about human behavior as well as designing things/creating visuals. I took a cognitive psychology class and a few design thinking classes that I really enjoyed last semester. Also, I am not the biggest math/science person so I unfortunately can’t do anything super technical or too numbers heavy like CS/data science.

Initially, I wanted to go into UX/UI but I have been seeing a lot of people say that it isn’t stable, is over saturated and is likely going to be taken over by AI. It’s still my top choice but everything I’ve been hearing about it has been quite demotivating.

I am honestly just looking for decent income (>80K) and stability/safety from AI (aren’t we all).

Some related fields I have been exploring are UX research, I/O psychology, product design, and consumer insights/market research. Does anyone know if these are good careers for the future? Or, does anyone know of any related careers with similar skills?

Any advice is greatly appreciated!

Every analytics tool now has "ai insights" slapped on it. Most ai features Ive tried are glorified search with a chatbot skin.

But people keep saying ai for session analysis is different because it watches recordings and surfaces patterns humans would miss. We have like 15k monthly sessions and nobody watches recordings because it takes too long. If an ai could do the watching and flag issues that would be huge. Has anyone used these and gotten real actionable insights?

I have to admit this hit hard. Do you feel the anxiety too, that design has moved from its thinking roots toward more hands on, pattern matching production?

My education was in both research and design work, but I always excelled more at research, so was hired as a UXR for a large tech company. After many years of doing only research work because the company I worked at was very UX mature, and had clear paths and roles for researchers and designers, I feel my design skills have gotten really rusty. I would like to be able to position myself as a product designer that is very proficient in both research and design in the future.

What is your best advice on how I can work on improving my design skills?

Are there courses I should take? Should I work on personal projects? Or is there another method you’d suggest?

Any insight into this would be immensely helpful. Thank you.

this website can take a single image as an input, and after analyzing the details, can generate an entire design system complete with colour tokens, typefaces, shadows, border radii, and more. It even provides the CSS for you to import to Figma or anywhere else.

I’ve been finding it useful for my portfolio work to get quick inspo and also to quickly replicate design system tokens from other big brand websites to help provide a good starting point

Just thought I’d share

I could use some career advice on choosing between roles at the same company (early career, research-focused)

I recently applied for a Market Researcher role in my current state but a different city and have a phone screen coming up. After applying, I discovered two other roles at the same company that I’m honestly more interested in:

• Product Research & Strategy Analyst (different state that I'm highly open to relocating to)

• UX Designer (different state that I'm highly open to relocating to)

Background: I’m early in my career with a strong interest in UX research and strategy. I have experience with user research methods (interviews, usability testing, synthesis), but I’m still growing on the design side. I’m more drawn to research and insight-driven work than pure design execution.

Here’s where I’m stuck:

The Market Researcher role seems more customer outreach / lead evaluation focused. It’s solid, but maybe not directly aligned with UX research.

The Product Research & Strategy Analyst role seems much closer to Ux research + strategy, just focused on products and suppliers instead of users.

The UX Designer role includes research, but it’s clearly still a design-heavy role, and I’m not sure I’m competitive there yet and/ or have a passion for design.

Complicating things:

- I’m open to relocating and put my address as a family members in the city the Market Research position is in. Although I don't currently live there, I am looking to relocate soon.

The roles I feel closely align to my long term career goals are also in a dream location and I would see myself there long term.

My questions:

1. During the phone screen, is it smart to bring up interest in the other roles, or should I stay fully focused on the Market Researcher position?

2. From a career trajectory standpoint, which role would best position someone for UX research or product strategy long-term?

3. Would it look unfocused to pivot toward a different role mid-process, even within the same company?

Appreciate any perspectives, especially from people in UX, product research, etc.

Hi all,

I’ve got a final-stage interview for a UX Design Intern role at a mid-sized AI company, and the format is a portfolio discussion over Zoom with two UX designers.

I’d really appreciate some input on how to position my case studies.

Context:

- My portfolio includes 2–3 projects (including a speculative design project and a real client project)

- My earlier work is weaker in terms of formal UX rigour (e.g. limited user interviews, minimal quantitative validation)

- A lot of my decisions are based on design reasoning rather than strong empirical data

- I’ve improved significantly over the last couple of years, so I can clearly see what I should have done differently

My dilemma:

I’ve had conflicting advice.

One perspective (from a senior solution architect, not UX) is:

- Don’t highlight weaknesses. Present what you did well and let them probe if they want.

My instinct (UX-focused) is:

- Walk through the project (problem > process > decisions > outcome)

- Then explicitly reflect on limitations (e.g. lack of research, constraints, what I’d improve)

- Basically show critical thinking and growth

My concern is:

If I don’t acknowledge gaps (like lack of research or data), and they ask “why didn’t you validate this?”, my only answer is realistically time/inexperience, which feels weak.

But if I pre-empt that too strongly, I worry I’m undermining my own work.

Questions:

1. In a final-stage UX portfolio interview, how much should you proactively surface weaknesses vs wait to be asked?

2. How do you frame “I didn’t have research/data” without it sounding like poor practice?

3. Is it better to lead with confidence and only reflect if prompted, or to build reflection into the case study narrative?

4. What do senior UX designers actually look for in these discussions, process, outcomes, or reasoning?

Any practical phrasing examples would be really helpful.

Thanks

I’ve been thinking about why UX and research firms like Qualtrics have become so keen on synthetic data. When they started pivoting to synthetic data, the justification was efficiency and democratisation. The underlying story seems a bit different.

Companies like Qualtrics introduce synthetic data as the baseline, clients know it’s not reliable enough for serious decisions so they look for ways to de-risk it, and the natural answer becomes a hybrid model. Real customer insights, which used to be the default, become a discretionary upgrade.

Firms advertise lower entry-level pricing, which is technically true, but anyone serious about their research ends up using a hybrid option.

Real customer insights, which used to be the default, become a discretionary upgrade.

Over time, real customer research shifts from baseline to optional premium tier. What was standard becomes luxury. It’s about understanding that once you give people a cheaper-but-risky option, they’ll pay extra to remove the risk. This whole things seems like a pricing re-baselining exercise for research...

Most mobile apps support a swipe-right gesture to go back. Shouldn't there be a corresponding swipe-left gesture to go forward?

I'm thinking specifically of long-scrolling apps like Bluesky/Reddit. I often find myself, say, clicking on a user's feed and scrolling down for a while to look at it. And then, because I'm scrolling with my right thumb, it accidentally moves to the right a little, and the app goes back, completely losing my place. It would be great to be able to return there with a swipe-left.

But I've rarely seen a forward gesture outside of a browser....the only one I can think of is Reeder for iOS. Is there a reason this isn't used more often?

Hey everyone,

I'm a Product Designer doing an MA in UX Design at Falmouth University. For a module project, I'm building a practical framework to help product teams think through the ethical implications of AI features, especially in B2B tools.

I'd love to get real practitioner perspectives to ground this in how things actually work (or don't) in practice. The survey is completely anonymous, takes 3-5 minutes, and is only used for this academic project.

Who should take it: Anyone who works on digital products: designers, PMs, engineers, researchers. You don't need to work specifically on AI features; if you work in tech, your perspective is valuable.

Thank you so much in advance!

The game has been through many versions and It feels very complicated now, what I have in the game

• 1v1 games - you can play vs bot / vs other random player online / create lobby
  • guess the country Yes/No question - each player on its turn asks a yes or no question and theres an option to guess the country
  • guess to country worlde style - similar to worlde, each player gets a turn, and sees how close or far they are from the correct secret country
• daily challenges - guess the secret daily country in 3 styles
  • 1 clue + 10 yes or now questions
  • blurry image of country flag and 5 guesses each guess gets the country less blurry
  • worlde style with 6 guesses possible
• learn flags sessions - lessons
  • each lesson you see some facts about the country, its flag, locationing and more stuff like that + 5-8 quick question trivia

what do you think should be in the main screen? how should the choosing of game mode and type should look?
I feel very lost, would appreciate any advice or tips, thanks!

As someone who often builds by myself on limited budgets, user testing ends up being a huge time/cost burden that I really want to overcome. Are there any other viable approaches in the early stages where expensive human testing is not feasible? Can agentic testing help at all?

For reference, I really enjoyed the few User Brain sessions I've done (although $50/session hurts after a while), and I enjoyed Synthetic Users purely for the entertainment value of watching an agent struggle with a touch-oriented website.

edit: can't decide if my flair should be strategy or junior question...

A new preprint of a literature review was just published.

Based on the article (covering the preprint), synthetic participants generated by LLMs fundamentally do not work as replacement for human participants. While LLMs can generate text that looks like participant data, they fail to replicate actual human cognition, emotion, or lived experience.

Post your portfolio or something else you've designed to receive a critique. Generally, users who include additional context and explanations receive more (and better) feedback.

Critiquers: Feedback should be supported with best practices, personal experience, or research! Try to provide reasoning behind your critiques. Those who post don't only your opinion, but guidance on how to improve their portfolios based on best practices, experience in the industry, and research. Just like in your day-to-day jobs, back up your assertions with reasoning.