Editor's note: Michael Carlon is director of user experience research at Charter Communications. With nearly 30 years of experience in qualitative research, marketing and user experience, he has helped global brands uncover human insights to build better products and services. He holds a BA in psychology from University of Connecticut and an MBA with a concentration in marketing from Fairfield University. Find him at linkedin.com/in/mikecarlon.
Earlier this year I attended the annual Qualitative Research Consultants Association conference and one breakout session centered around a familiar question: How can we make online interviews feel more like in-person interviews? It’s a fair question. For decades, in-person interviews were the gold standard for qualitative research. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, live remote interviews were chipping away at in-person sessions because they were less expensive to run. There was no need to rent facilities and feed people nor did you have to travel from market to market. Recruiting was easier and national representation was often stronger. Operations were streamlined in ways that made business stakeholders very happy but yet something is different; the dynamic just isn’t the same.
As a moderator, it’s harder to read the room. You cannot lean forward to invite depth or gently shift posture to move things along. Rather, you have to call on people to prevent them from talking over one another. You are constantly managing microphones, dodgy video, lags and that awkward split second where two people begin speaking at the same time and both retreat.
Attention spans are different online and it’s not uncommon for participants to wander while others are talking. Some open another browser window and others scroll on their phones while the remaining half listen while waiting to be called on again. In one-on-one interviews, this is easier to manage, but the traps remain; there are bad connections, background noise and multitasking. I once had a hotel front desk agent attempt to complete an interview while on shift, excusing herself repeatedly to help guests with issues.
And then there are the drivers! No matter how clearly we state that participants must be stationary in a quiet environment, someone inevitably logs in from their car on the way to work or while running errands. “It’s okay, I can do this while driving,” they will say. Well, not on my watch. I don’t want that kind of liability, particularly since much of my work is UX-focused – I don’t want someone navigating a prototype and a left turn at the same time.
All this is to say I understand why our industry wants to devote brainpower to making online interviews feel more like controlled, in-person sessions, but I would argue that it’s actually the wrong question. The better question is this: How do we create an online environment where participants want to stay engaged, not only to add value to the session but to hear what others have to say?
Remote research is not broken, but our approach to it often is. Here are 10 ways to rethink our craft.
Think like a talk show host, not a moderator. If you want active participation, bring more of yourself into the session. Adopt the persona not only of an unbiased researcher, but of someone who can entertain without compromising rigor. Get participants laughing early to signal that this will not be a sterile Q&A. Energy is contagious, even through a screen, and participants take their cues from you.
Treat them like guests, not participants. Guests are welcomed and introduced thoughtfully and they are invited into a conversation rather than interrogated. The first five minutes matter enormously. In person, proximity creates warmth but online you must manufacture psychological proximity. Consider introducing your guests based on their screener responses or a bio statement they’ve shared prior to the session vs. having them introduce themselves. Then start with something light and slightly unexpected that gets everyone speaking early. Once someone has used their voice in the opening minutes, they are far more likely to use it again.
Keep the group small (less is more). Online groups do not benefit from size; in fact, they suffer from it. Resist the temptation to seat six, seven or eight people just because you can. Four to five participants is often the sweet spot. Fewer voices mean more airtime for each person, less cross talk and more depth. Smaller groups create accountability and intimacy, both of which drive engagement. I’d recommend doing a larger number of smaller groups than a smaller number of larger groups any day of the week.
Be explicit about the stakes. In a facility, the environment itself signals importance; participants may have arranged childcare, driven across town and walked into a space that feels official, which naturally raises the perceived stakes. Online, they may be at their kitchen tables with a barking dog nearby and an inbox open in another tab. Remote sessions compete with real life in ways in-person groups rarely do. If you do not elevate the significance of the conversation, it risks feeling like just another Zoom call. That’s why you must be explicit about impact by clearly explaining how their feedback will shape a product launch, influence messaging or determine what gets put on next quarter’s roadmap. When participants understand that what they say will travel beyond the screen and affect a real decision, attention sharpens, engagement deepens and they show up with a level of presence that goes well beyond the incentive.
Name the distractions before they sabotage you. Since you know attention will drift, address it directly. I often say at the beginning, “If you are tempted to check e-mail while someone else is talking, that is usually when the most interesting comments happen.” It is part humor, part challenge. People respond when you raise the bar and treat them like capable contributors rather than passive respondents.
Design for participation instead of waiting for it. Rather than posing broad questions and hoping volunteers jump in, create micro-commitments. Tell participants you are going around the room for quick reactions before diving deeper. Remove the dominance dynamic that allows two strong personalities to take over. People engage more when they know their voice is expected, not optional.
Encourage participants to respond to each other, not just to you. It is easy online to become the hub of every exchange so resist that instinct and redirect deliberately. If someone is nodding, ask what resonated in another participant’s comment. When participants begin listening for meaning rather than waiting for their turn, engagement increases dramatically.
Use the platform intentionally. In person, people react to one another with body language. Online, silence can look like disengagement even when it is not. Ask for quick signals in chat. Use visible thumbs up or down or built-in reactions in whatever tool you are using. Consider polling briefly before opening the floor. Movement creates energy and also gives quieter participants a low-risk way to contribute before speaking at length.
Introduce tension on purpose. Online groups often default to polite agreement because disagreement feels awkward on screen, yet conflict is frequently where the richest insights live. When you sense harmony settling in too quickly, ask who sees it differently. Ask what the counterargument would be if this were a real debate. Give permission for friction and the conversation will come alive (just like Peter Frampton).
Shorten the segments, not the depth. Attention online works in waves so break topics into tighter arcs and signal transitions clearly. Let participants know when you are shifting gears and when you are moving quickly. Momentum keeps people with you; it mirrors how good storytellers structure scenes – and make no mistake, we are in the storytelling business.
Chasing a ghost
Remote research is not a downgrade from in-person work; it’s simply a different stage. The camera is unforgiving, but it is also intimate. You see people in their kitchens and home offices. You glimpse their real lives. There is a humanity in that setting that does not exist in a focus group facility or hotel conference room. If we continue asking how to make online feel like in-person, we will keep chasing a ghost. Instead, if we ask how to make remote sessions compelling in their own right, we elevate the craft. Perhaps this is where the next generation of great moderators will distinguish themselves.