What a UX researcher
portfolio should include.
A UX researcher portfolio should be two or three studies, each showing the question, the method you chose and why, how you recruited and ran it, how you synthesised the findings, and the product decision it changed. Hiring managers read for rigour and for influence, so the strongest signal is a study that moved a roadmap, not a wall of affinity-map screenshots. Every participant must be anonymised: no faces, names, verbatim quotes that identify, or raw recordings on a public page. Below is the full list of what to put in, the terms a research recruiter actually searches, and which of the Portfolio designs suit a study writeup.
The sections a research portfolio needs.
A researcher is hired on methodological rigour and on evidence that findings changed something. The portfolio is organised around a few studies told in full. Work through these, and read the flagged block before you publish any session material.
Two or three full study writeups
Each writeup covers the research question, the method, the participants in aggregate, the key findings, and the decision that followed. A reviewer would rather read one study you can defend than a gallery of deliverables with no reasoning behind them.
Method choice and why
Name the study type, usability test, in-depth interview, diary study, survey, or unmoderated test, and say why it fit the question. The ability to match a method to a question and its constraints is the core competency a research lead screens for.
Recruitment and study design
Explain how you sampled, how many participants, what screener you used, and how you avoided leading questions. Sound sampling and a clean protocol show you can produce findings a team can trust, not just anecdotes.
Synthesis, not just notes
Show how raw sessions became themes and insights: affinity mapping, coding, a research repository. The hard part of the job is turning many messy sessions into a small number of decisions, so make that reasoning visible.
Impact on a decision
State what changed because of the study: a feature cut, a redesign, a reprioritised roadmap, a killed idea. Research that only produced a report reads as weaker than research that changed what the team built next.
Quant and mixed methods
If you run surveys or analyse behavioural data, show a metric alongside the qualitative story. A researcher who can triangulate a survey, an analytics read, and interviews is trusted with bigger, riskier questions.
Never include: identifiable participant data
No participant names or initials, no faces in session photos or video, no verbatim quotes that reveal an identity, no raw recordings, and no personal data collected under a consent form that promised confidentiality. Publishing it breaks your participants' consent and, with personal data, data-protection law.
Anonymise everything: "P4, an enterprise admin" instead of a name, blurred or omitted screens, and paraphrased quotes when a verbatim would identify. The consent your participants gave was for research use, not for a public portfolio, so honour it.
Terms a research recruiter searches.
Research recruiters filter their applicant tracking system for methods and tools. If these describe your actual practice, use the exact words, because the system indexes the string you wrote, not the skill behind it.
Paste your resume into the free ATS score checker with a real research posting to see which of these terms the posting uses and your resume is missing.
Which designs suit a study writeup.
A research portfolio is narrative with supporting artefacts, and every artefact has to be safe to show. Of the 60 Portfolio designs and 48 resume layouts, these are the shapes that fit.
Pick a design that carries a study as a readable report with clear sections and space for a redacted artefact or a simple chart. Skip the photo-led gallery designs, which invite the raw session imagery you must not publish.
Of the 48 resume layouts, use a single-column one so a methods list and tool stack parse cleanly. Lead each role with a study and the decision it drove, not a task description.
Open each study with the question and close with the decision it changed, keeping the method in the middle. A research lead reads for that arc, so make the influence obvious rather than buried in process detail.
Use a quiet design and precise language. Overstated claims are a red flag in research, so let the sampling, the method, and the outcome carry the credibility instead of adjectives.
Who a UX research portfolio is not for.
A portfolio is close to mandatory in this field, but not for every situation. Read this before you build, because sometimes the blocker is consent, not effort.
Worth building if you
- +Are applying to almost any UX research role, where a portfolio is expected and a research interview walks through it.
- +Are moving in from a related field, psychology, market research, or academia, and need to show applied product studies.
- +Have studies you can anonymise cleanly or can rebuild on a personal or open project.
- +Want one link that shows range across method, synthesis, and influence on decisions.
Skip it, for now, if you
- −Only have work you cannot anonymise or that consent forms forbid you to share. Rebuild a study you can publish first.
- −Would be tempted to include a real face, name, or identifying quote. If in doubt, do not publish it.
- −Are a senior researcher hiring entirely through referrals, where a portfolio walkthrough replaces a public site.
- −Have an interview this week. Prepare your study walkthrough and fix your resume first, then build the site.
Questions researchers ask.
Straight answers on studies, participant privacy, and what a research lead reads for.
How many studies should a UX research portfolio show?
Two or three, each told in full from question to decision. A research lead will walk through one in the interview, so depth and defensibility matter more than count. A single rigorous study that changed a roadmap says more than five deliverable galleries with no outcome attached.
How do I show research without exposing participants?
Anonymise everything. Refer to participants by code, not name; omit or blur faces and screens; paraphrase quotes that would identify someone; and never post raw recordings. The consent your participants gave covered research use, not publication, so treat any identifying detail as off-limits and rebuild sensitive studies on safe material if needed.
Can I include work I did under NDA?
Only in abstracted form. Describe the question, the method, and the type of impact without the employer's confidential product plans, unreleased features, or internal data. If you cannot abstract it without breaking the NDA or exposing participants, use a personal or academic study you have full rights to instead.
Do I need quantitative studies, or is qualitative enough?
Qualitative depth is the foundation, and many roles are satisfied by it. Showing at least one mixed-methods study, though, where a survey or analytics read triangulates with interviews, signals you can handle larger, higher-stakes questions and speaks to teams that weight numbers heavily.
Should I show my synthesis process or just the findings?
Show enough of the synthesis to prove the findings are earned. A reader wants to see how many messy sessions became a small set of insights, through coding, affinity mapping, or a repository, without drowning in raw notes. Lead with the insight and the decision, then reveal the method that got you there.
Where to go next.
Build the site, test your resume, or read how the paste-a-resume flow works.
Turn your research
resume into a site.
Paste your resume and Portfolio drafts a clean, study-led website in about a minute. Method and impact up top, participants anonymised, published to your own domain with TLS handled for you.