Learnings from interviews with distance-learning students

Design thinking: exploring loneliness and isolation in distance learning

As part of my design thinking project, I interviewed several distance-learning students about loneliness and isolation. Since I'm not particularly deep into UX research yet, I first had AI generate some questions, then reviewed them and adjusted them to match my own instincts.

That's exactly the part where I learned the most.

I noticed pretty quickly how strongly the quality of the answers depends on how a question is phrased. Small changes in wording make a big difference. Some questions lead to very generic answers, others suddenly open up space for personal experiences. Beforehand, that was mostly theoretical for me – in the interview, it becomes very concrete.

It also helped me to ask myself the questions before going into the conversations. That let me better judge whether a question was understandable and how open it felt.

Another point was sharing the questions in advance. At first I wondered whether that made sense, since spontaneous reactions can be interesting too. In this context, though, it turned out to be helpful. The topic is personal and not necessarily easy to grasp. Many participants came into the conversation prepared and were able to talk about their experiences in a more structured way. As a result, the answers often turned out more reflective.

What was new to me was also how sensitive the topic felt in conversation. Loneliness isn't something people automatically talk about openly. It made a difference how I opened the conversations, how much time I gave, and whether I could tolerate silence. I noticed that not every good answer comes right away.

Besides the interviews, feedback from my fellow students was also very valuable. Especially on conducting the conversations and on the effect of individual questions, I got pointers I wouldn't have noticed myself. That helped me see my own role in the conversation more consciously, instead of just focusing on the guide.

What I specifically take away from the interviews

• Good questions rarely emerge on the first try. Revising is part of the process.
• Testing them yourself helps. Many ambiguities only show up that way.
• Preparation can help with sensitive topics.
• Questions that are too open unsettle people faster than you'd think.
• Small changes in wording can make a big difference.

What's clearer to me after the project: as a UX researcher, you need a high level of attentiveness. It's about asking the right questions, listening closely to the person in front of you, and responding with empathy.

At the same time, I noticed that AI can be a good starting point, but you risk ending up with questions that are too open and unspecific. The suggestions were helpful for getting started. The questions only really became fitting through my own revisions and through exchange with others.

Next time, I'd invest even more time in preparation and maybe work more with variations of the guide, simply to be able to react more flexibly when a conversation takes an unexpected direction.

Overall, this project was a good introduction to interviews in a UX context for me. Especially because I now have a much better sense of how much influence seemingly small decisions have on the quality of the results. 😊