3 functions of note-taking in qualitative research and one expert’s approach to leveraging memory for faster analysis

Notes are a huge part of the qualitative UX research process. But are we getting everything out of them that we should be?

When you think about it, research notes actually serve three functions. Sure, there’s the first function, with which we are likely all familiar:

1. Notes convert verbal interview content into a written format that can easily be scanned, sorted, and condensed during synthesis.

But the second and third functions are ones we don’t think about enough:

2. The act of taking notes itself helps strengthen your memory and understanding of the content.

3. Notes serve as stimuli that trigger stored knowledge when we review them, which enables us to make faster connections.

When it comes to qualitative UX research, relying solely on the first function of notes — and taking a completely bottom-up approach to synthesis — is pretty inefficient. It’s a recipe for a high cognitive load situation in which you’re trying to use a lot of granular pieces of data to piece together a bigger picture of what you heard, then extrapolate what’s most important from there.

Plus, you miss out on a lot of potential for actively developing your own learning and understanding while the data is still fresh in your mind.

Although researchers may still need to take verbatim notes during interviews to share with team members or to keep as a record, we shouldn’t overlook the need to create strong memories of our research sessions, and to create notes that reflect our learnings and takeaways rather than just a detailed account of what was said.

Unlocking the second two functions of note-taking offers a game-changing key to working smarter, not harder.

A tried-and-true approach to note-taking that leverages memory for faster analysis

While working at the Bentley User Experience Center, I was fortunate enough to learn from Lena Dmitrieva, a seasoned researcher with over 20 years of UX research experience, whose process for using note-taking strategically to actively process qualitative data throughout the duration of a research study has really stuck with me.

Dmitrieva was acutely aware of the importance of memory in her research practice. She knew that newly-formed memories containing insights and ideas gathered during qualitative interviews begin to decay almost immediately. She also knew that bottom-up analysis is difficult and time-consuming. Her approach was to capitalize off of the recency effect of memory by beginning to document findings as early as possible, rather than saving it all for the final analysis.

This is what our research team did:

• During each interview: Note-takers and observers took notes in whatever style they preferred.
• Immediately after each interview: Team held a quick debrief focused around key observations and learnings.
• Within 30 minutes of each interview: Moderator wrote a very short summary of the interview focused only on the most important takeaways. Our goal was to keep takeaways high-level, digestible, and succinct, so they could be easily understood after time had passed.
• Within 1–3 days of the interview: We always started writing our report while still conducting interviews, updating it daily. Dmietrieva would ask our research team to think about what the report would say if we had to base our findings on what we had heard thus far. This helped us document our working theories, identify gaps in our understanding, and keep learnings top-of-mind for upcoming interviews.
• After all interviews were over: We went back to the notes to check our understanding, re-evaluate insights, and fill in gaps with data synthesis. We looked for trends, checked for bias, cross-examined our perspectives, reviewed recordings if we had questions, and in general spent lots of time examining and tweaking our findings to reflect our evolving understanding.

How this method helped our team

I wanted to share this method because it’s still one of the most efficient approaches to qualitative analysis I’ve ever worked with. When we used it, our team was able to “get there” significantly faster. We were able to keep the data fresh in our mind, which enabled faster synthesis and more time for critical thinking, which is, in my opinion, the fun part.

There are a few things at play with this method. First, you’ll notice that you’ll still have notes and recordings to reference for accuracy. But rather than waiting until synthesis to start thinking critically, you’ve budgeted time to analyze your findings between each interview and collectively at the end of each day.

The summaries are the star player at work. Documenting key takeaways as you go forces you to focus on insights and observations that rise to the top. Summaries also serve as great references to jog your memory about each participant after time has passed, or catch a new team member up to speed. Again, this doesn’t mean you can’t review more detailed notes or the recording if you see something emerge that you want to look for across participants.

Importantly, maintaining a working understanding of your learnings enables continued pivots and adjustments to the script and overall approach. When my research team used this, there were several instances when we thought of additional questions to add to the script that would help us explore a theory or understand a trend — and the additional feedback we gathered was really helpful for building out a more balanced finding in the end.

Finally, when you get to the analysis phase and you’ve already done half the tactical work already, you may have a little extra time for analysis, which is something that can otherwise be in short supply. And with a sharper top-down understanding, discussions are often more focused and fruitful.

Don’t forget to watch out for bias

Remember, I’m not suggesting you abandon your notes altogether, just that you learn to use what you’ve got (your memory) a little better, and trust your own brain a little more. It’s still very important to pay attention to your own biases and fact-check all assumptions — but it’s also ok to let your memory help you identify where to look first.

Interested in learning more ways to work smarter, not harder in UX research? Check out this article about using memory strategically.