'%20fill='%2300FF00'/%3e%3c/svg%3e)
For user researchers
A study a day. Not a study a quarter.
Totem hosts the depth interviews you'd run yourself, only it does fourteen of them at once. You get the synthesis, the verbatims, and your calendar back.
Silent betaFully free in beta
Concept Validation, Threaded Collab
Concept validation study. Totem ran this conversation across 12 participants and synthesized what came back into the takeaway below.
Key findingsAI-synthesized from 12 participants
The concept lands for 9 of 12 on the core use case, but the thread metaphor breaks at handoff for 5 of them once a comment crosses teams. Three named the missing 'resolved' state as the deal-breaker. Six asked for the AI summary visible above the thread before anything ships, and four want a linkable single-comment view for cross-team work.
- Concept resonates
- Metaphor breaks at handoff
- Missing 'resolved' state
- Wants AI summary above
- Wants linkable comment view
- 20%Positive
- 40%Friction
- 40%Focus
- Responses
- 0
- Fully completed
- 0/0
- Avg. completion
- 0%
- Avg. length
- 0m
From silent-beta calls
“My fear was that this would replace me. After two studies, the fear shifted: it lets me ship in a week what I used to fight to ship in a quarter.”
— a senior researcher in the silent beta
What user researchers ask first
“But this replaces me.”
It replaces the part of you that runs the calls, not the part of you that designs them. The protocol, the probes, the rubric, you write those once and Totem holds the chair. Deciding what to learn, judging what the synthesis means, that's still you. The fear-then-relief shift is the most consistent thing we hear two studies in.
What user researchers start with
The studies you'd run if you had the time.
Concept testing
Concept testing
Reactions to a rough idea before you build.
User segment research
User segment research
The specific itch each segment scratches.
Brand perception
Brand perception
How customers describe you to their friends.
Why researchers pick Totem
- 01
You stay in the seat. Totem holds the chair while you double the throughput. Same open questions, same probes, same rubric, no rep-fatigue drift.
- 02
Every claim cited. Every theme is grounded in the verbatims. Every sample is auditable. The synthesis is defensible in any stakeholder meeting.
- 03
Your calendar holds the synthesis. Not the interviews themselves. The work you trained for is the work you do; the rest happens while you're at lunch.
What changes
What changes for user researchers.
- 01
More research cycles, same depth
AI-moderated interviews let you run far more research at the depth and insight quality you'd expect from hosting each one yourself.
- 02
Research without the calendar bottleneck
Voice and reasoning models now make depth interviews possible at the speed of surveys. The constraint is no longer headcount or scheduling, it's the questions.
- 03
Fear-then-relief
Researchers in the silent beta describe the shift in two acts: the fear that AI replaces them, then the relief that they ship a study a week instead of a quarter.
Totem silent beta
Common questions
What user researchers ask before they try Totem.
- How can user researchers scale qualitative research with AI?
- By delegating the call itself — not the protocol or the analysis — to an AI moderator. Totem hosts the depth interviews researchers would run themselves, only fourteen at once. Researchers stay in the seat designing the questions and reviewing the synthesis; the time-cost of running the calls drops to zero.
- What's the best AI-moderated user research tool?
- It depends on the workflow. Totem is built for researchers running frequent depth studies at scale: one protocol seeds every interview, the AI adapts probes per participant, every claim in the synthesis is grounded in a verbatim, and throughput goes from a study a quarter to a study a week.
- How does AI-moderated research compare to live moderated interviews?
- AI-moderated interviews preserve depth (open questions, adaptive probes, transcribed verbatims) while removing the time and scheduling cost, so you can run far more research without losing the quality you'd get from hosting each one yourself. Live moderated still wins on novel-rapport-required interviews; AI-moderated wins on throughput.
- Can AI replace user researchers?
- No — and the framing misses what's happening. AI replaces the time-cost of running the call, not the craft of designing the protocol or interpreting the synthesis. Researchers in Totem's silent beta describe the shift as fear-then-relief: the fear that AI replaces them, then the relief that they ship a study a week instead of a quarter.
- How does Totem compare to Outset.ai, Listen Labs, or Conveo?
- All four host AI-moderated interviews; the differences are in workflow. Outset and Conveo lean enterprise team-research; Listen Labs leans market-research scale. Totem is built for the researcher's daily loop — one prompt to seed a study, every claim grounded in a verbatim, synthesis that fits in a stakeholder Slack message.
- How fast can you run an AI-moderated study?
- Setup-to-first-result in under a day in most studies. You describe the study in one prompt — what you want to learn, who you're talking to, what success looks like — and Totem turns it into a protocol, hosts the calls on participant schedules, and delivers the synthesis. The longest part is reviewing the rough cut.
Your turn
Describe the study. Run it tomorrow.
One prompt seeds the protocol. Totem hosts every interview, transcribes every line, and synthesizes every theme. You review the rough cut.
Drop your promptFree during the betaNo cardYour prompt, your data