The other side of the conversation: 3 reasons why UX researchers should take a turn as a participant

Being able to design for different perspectives and preferences is a real skill, and it’s extremely difficult. It can become even harder when designing for neurodiverse audiences, where people are hard-wired in unique ways. However, being able to cater to neurodiverse preferences is extremely important.

‍

Designer Kalina Tyrkiel says between 15-20% of people around the world are neurodiverse, which is a significant proportion. Various conditions such as dyslexia, attention deficit disorders, and autism can have considerable impacts on how people interact with interfaces and platforms. By considering these implications, designers can dramatically improve the accessibility of their work and improve engagement for neurodiverse individuals. Even simple tweaks like using an actual number instead of writing it out (i.e., 1 instead of “one”) can make a huge difference. 

‍

Kalina explores universal tips and techniques that allow designers to cater for neurodiverse audiences.

‍

Kalina’s background 

‍

Kalina Tyrkiel is a content designer with a unique background that spans both technical UX skills and a human-centric approach to design. She primarily works as a designer for Polish healthtech company DocPlanner, connecting users with relevant health services. Her background as a trained psychologist significantly supports her work and provides a deeper understanding into how people think.  She is also a UX writing trainer and university lecturer, which further speaks to her expertise.

‍

Contact Details:

You can find Kalina on LinkedIn.

‍

Words that welcome: content design with neurodiversity in mind 📖

‍

Neurodiversity is often misunderstood by society at large. Neurodiverse conditions often exist on a spectrum, and solutions that work for one person don’t necessarily work for someone else. Similarly, neurodiversity often comes in batches. Kalina outlines how 60% of people with ADHD also have traits of autism. This further complicates their perspectives and needs.

‍

So this leaves us with a pressing question. How can designers cater for all people with such different needs? Kalina describes how designing for a neurodiverse audience is actually not much different from designing for a neurotypical audience. For example, on any given day, individuals experience varying levels of stress or relaxation which impacts their energy and attention levels. 

‍

What to keep in mind when designing for neurodiverse audiences 

‍

1. Provide clear instructions

• Use bullet points and lists for better scannability
• For different options, use if/then tables
• Reduce the probability of displaying an error message. For example, when requiring a new password, outline password requirements up front.

‍

2. Make the purpose clear

For example, ensure the title aligns with the content the user can expect. Misalignment can create significant confusion for neurodiverse audiences.

‍

3. Don’t justify text

Justifying text and varying the spacing between words makes it harder to read, particularly for dyslexic users.

4. Include different ways to access content

For example, some people may prefer voice search, others may prefer content that’s not in a video. Again, this is no different from neurotypical audiences.

‍

5. Keep it simple 

The simpler the interface and the simpler the copy, the better. Pay attention to consistency too - if a platform or site varies a lot, this can be confusing. 

‍

Why it matters 💥

‍

Considering neurodiverse audiences in the design process is critical in making platforms easy to use for all people. The needs of neurodiverse users can amplify problems or create critical issues out of something that’s a minor inconvenience for someone else. Again, a 15-20% audience is not insignificant, so it pays to be mindful of their needs. So how can you actually do it?

‍

Hire for diversity 🌍

Having diverse teams can bring a broad array of perspectives to the design process. Just remember that not all neurodiverse people think the same. Dr Stephen Shore said “when you know one person with autism, you know one person with autism”.  Think about diversity as creating preferences, rather than labels. Ask respectfully about someone’s preferences and don’t judge them (or others) based on their condition.

‍

Tools and techniques 🛠️

‍

• In videos, use closed captions, not just subtitles - they can be much more user-friendly. Keep them to 40 characters per line, and up to two lines of similar length. 

‍

Interestingly, closed captions and subtitles are also being more and more preferred by younger generations. 

‍

• Kalina recommends Hemingway as a tool to keep language simple and consistent.
  
• Neurodiversity.design is a website that enables designers to get insights about fonts, typography, interfaces and other general design elements with an eye to neurodiverse audiences.

‍

‍

Recruiting the right participants is one of the biggest challenges teams face when conducting user research. Poor quality or disengaged testers can lead to unreliable data. While bottlenecks in recruitment – long lead times and limited access – can delay studies, reduce research frequency, and slow product development. 

‍

Having flexible options helps you keep moving at pace. Whether you bring your own participants, use Optimal’s recruitment services, or leverage external panel providers, Optimal gives you the flexibility to recruit the right user testers consistently and efficiently so you can launch studies faster, run them more frequently, and quickly scale research across multiple projects.

‍

Here’s a breakdown of your recruitment options with Optimal:

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

1.  Invite Your Own Participants For Free

‍

Optimal lets you invite your own participants with a study link, QR code, or intercept snippet at no extra cost, giving you full control over who takes part in your studies.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

2. Use Any Panel Provider You Prefer

‍

Optimal works seamlessly with any panel provider, such as User Interviews, Respondent, PureSpectrum, Prolific, Dynata, Askable, and Cint.

‍

‍

How it works:

‍

1. Create and publish an unmoderated study in Optimal, such as a live site test, prototype test, survey, first-click test, card sort or tree test.
2. Specify your audience criteria in the panel platform.
3. Add screener questions in your panel provider and/or Optimal.
4. Add your Optimal study link into the panel provider platform.
5. Panel provider recruits participants and manages incentives.
6. See a participant list in Optimal and review participant metrics like completion rate, time taken, and location breakdown.
7. Optional: Create segments in Optimal for more targeted insights.
8. Review insights, results, and analytics in Optimal to make informed research decisions.

‍

Certain panel providers, like User Interviews, offer additional benefits through direct integration with Optimal. You can automate participant tracking and see participant status in real time in your panel provider platform as user testers complete your studies.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

3. Use Optimal’s Specialized Recruitment Services

‍

For teams that want expert support, Optimal Recruitment support taps into multiple panels to access over 20 million participants across 150 countries. Whether you're looking for a broad audience or something highly specific, we can help you find the right people to take part in your study.

‍

Optimal handles the panel selection, incentive management, and criteria refinement. We’ll even review and optimize your screener questions. Get started by submitting your criteria. 

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

4. Use Optimal’s Recruitment Panel

‍

Looking for another quick recruitment solution? You can order user testers instantly inside the Optimal platform. It’s ideal for B2C research and studies with basic demographic requirements, and Optimal takes care of incentives for you.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

Recruitment Flexibility and Quality

‍

You’re never locked into a single approach with Optimal. Instead, you can adapt your recruitment strategy to each study, balancing speed, quality, budget, and scale, while using the same research and user insights platform.

‍

From shareable study links to easy panel workflows and expert support when you need it, you can spend less time managing recruitment and more time gathering actionable user insights.

Self-serve recruitment made participant recruitment faster and more affordable, but it didn’t completely eliminate the challenge of finding targeted, engaged, and honest participants. In our recent webinar, we called out what 100 research teams said about how they recruit, and used what we learned to build the next evolution of Optimal Recruitment.

‍

‍

‍

Summary

‍

‍

• 75% of research teams say finding the right participants affects study quality or timelines.
• Self-serve tools made recruitment faster and cheaper, but shifted the work of screening, verification, chasing, and replacing participants
• 41% of researchers encounter fraudulent participants, while others struggle with participants who match criteria but provide poor-quality responses.
• Niche audiences are often difficult because multiple common criteria become rare when combined.
• The fix is a recruitment approach that combines multiple sources with automated checks and human in the loop to find reliable, high-quality participants.

‍

‍

‍

The 4 biggest challenges of participant recruitment

‍

‍

1. You can't find the right people

‍

75% of teams say that not finding the right people impacts either their study quality or their timelines, and two in five have research that simply doesn't happen because they can't source the right participants.

‍

‍

2. Some participants aren't who they say they are

‍

41% of researchers run into fraudulent participants, often using VPNs to present as multiple people, and knowledgeable enough to talk vaguely around a topic and slide past quality checks without saying anything specific or true.

‍

‍

3. The right participant on paper isn't always the right participant in practice

‍

You can nail the segment, role, and behavior criteria, and still end up with someone who can't articulate a clear thought. That's pushed teams toward workarounds like video screeners to gauge whether someone is introspective and genuinely who they claim to be. Automation is good at matching criteria, but it can’t judge whether someone is introspective and would provide quality data.

‍

‍

4. Stacked criteria make audiences hard to find

‍

Many audiences we call niche aren't actually made up of individually rare criteria. It's the combination of requirements that can make someone difficult to find. A specific role, at a certain company size, working in a specific function, using a specific tool are not criteria especially rare on their own. But layered together, the pool can get very small. 

‍

Solving these challenges takes a platform built to actually find the right people and verify them once they're found. 

‍

‍

‍

What is self-serve recruitment?

‍

‍

Self-serve recruitment was created to make participant recruitment faster and easier. Instead of working with an agency, researchers can order participants directly based on the demographics and criteria they need for their study. But while this makes recruitment more accessible, it doesn’t eliminate the work behind the scenes. Teams still have to screen, chase, verify, and replace participants, and four out of five researchers still say the core problem is open.

‍

Part of the problem is the way self-serve recruitment is typically built. Most tools rely on a single panel and try to make every recruitment request fit within it. Instead, Optimal starts with who you actually need to recruit, then determines where those participants are most likely to be found. We call this a multi-panel model. Some panels are stronger for moderated B2B recruitment, others for general population studies, and others for regional coverage. By combining them, Optimal Recruitment gives you access to 20M+ verified participants across 150+ countries.

‍

And the data suggests that this broader access matters more than speed alone. In a study of 100 people, only 9% chose faster turnaround as the most important thing to improve. When asked to pick just one thing to fix, they prioritized access to hard-to-reach people, reliability, and better targeting.

‍

That’s why our focus isn’t just on getting participants into a study quickly. It’s on getting the right participants, from the right sources, with quality built into the recruitment process from start to finish.

‍

‍

‍

Ensuring participant quality

‍

‍

Quality checks used to mean if they answered the screener correctly, but increasingly, it's about whether someone understood the task, engaged with it properly, and gave you something useful. Optimal Recruitment has layers of checks so you can find quality participants in every study:

‍

• Screeners to filter candidates before they begin your user research study
• Automated checks to flag straight-lining, repeated answers, and suspicious behavior patterns at scale
• Human in the loop catches what automation still can't, which matters more as research shifts toward formats like recorded usability tests

‍

Some teams want to submit an order and get straight into research. Others want more support: screener help, sourcing across panels, manual review, or a fully managed recruit. Neither is the "better" way to recruit. They're solving different problems.

‍

What we're doing is bringing those two worlds closer together.

‍

‍

‍

How to make a strong participant screener

‍

‍

A better screener doesn't necessarily mean a longer screener It's more about being clever with the questions you're asking.

‍

‍

Add a plausible but wrong option

‍

Rather than putting an answer or a red herring in that's really obviously fake and easy to spot, we like to include something that sounds like it could be right, but someone with genuine experience should know it isn't.

‍

‍

Ask the same thing twice but in slightly different ways

‍

You don't obviously want to literally repeat the question, but you might validate something they told you earlier in the screener from a different angle later. If their experience is genuine, those answers should match up and make sense together. And if they don't, it's a really useful signal to take a closer look at the participant.

‍

‍

Move more of your instructions into the screener itself, not just in the study

‍

Clear instructions are a huge contributor to participant quality, but sometimes what looks like a quality issue, it did actually start much earlier where the participant just didn't understand what they were signing up for. For example, in a recorded prototype test, state “this study requires you to speak your thoughts aloud as you complete the tasks, are you comfortable with that and in a quiet space?”; then, people who aren't comfortable can opt out before they ever get into the study.

‍

‍

‍

FAQ about Optimal Recruitment

‍

‍

What are participant profiles?

‍

You can build recruitment profiles which group targeting criteria, like demographics, location, device, job title, seniority, company size, industry, and B2B, as well as screener questions to recruit for your studies. You can also  exclude participants you’ve already spoken to for new perspectives. 

‍

‍

How many participants is enough?

‍

It depends on what you’re trying to learn. For usability testing, they tend to surface quickly, so around five participants per user group will often reveal almost all the problems. Concept testing may span a wider context, so you need a larger sample. 

‍

‍

How do you ensure you are not hearing from the same people?

‍

We recently have added exclusion controls to participant profiles that lets you automatically exclude participants who've taken part in your studies within a set period; for example, the last three months. This ensures you aren't hearing from the same pool of people.

‍

‍

How do you work to avoid participant fraud?

‍

Optimal ensures a 100% quality guarantee for participant responses by utilizing a multi-layered fraud prevention strategy that combines advanced technology with human oversight. Automated systems monitor participant behavior in real-time, detecting "speeders" by monitoring completion times, identifying skipping patterns or "straight-liners," and flagging any inconsistent responses. 

‍

Our award-winning panel partners maintain a fraud rate of less than 0.06% through advanced machine learning scoring systems (like PureScore) and AI-driven fraud detection, continuously screening participants. For any B2B studies, we will also cross check against LinkedIn profiles.

‍

‍

Can Optimal help me recruit participants for my next study?

‍

Yes, Optimal can help you recruit the right participants for your study. You'll see a time estimate for when participants should start coming through after submitting a request.

‍

Recruitment doesn’t become a bottleneck. Your research can finally start moving at the speed of the questions you're actually trying to answer. 

‍

👉 If you want to experience the full walkthrough and demo of Optimal Recruitment, watch the full training webinar here.

‍