Users say one thing, do another — which do I trust?

You can run the test. The clicking, the recording, the script — that part is settled. What eludes you is judgment: knowing which signal to weigh when the hands and the mouth disagree. This is not because your users lie to you. Most people do not know why they did what they did. Ask them, and they will build you an answer on the spot — reasonable-sounding, sincere, and often wrong. This is simply how minds work. It is not a flaw in your method. So stop hunting for the version of events where words and actions agree. They often won't. Your job is to hold both, label them honestly, and let the gap itself teach you something.

◆ How this problem reads on the two dials

GuidanceKnowledge

More coaching

Some to learn

1:1 with AureliusWith others (a Pod)

Mostly you & the coach

A little with peers

The core idea — behavior and self-report are different data types, not competing versions of the truth — can be taught in a few lines; the real work is building the habit of separating them under pressure, which takes practice.

How the two dials adapt to you →

What’s really going on

Trust what they did. Question what they said. A person's actions under real friction are fact. Their explanation afterward is a story they build to feel reasonable. Your task is not to believe the story — it is to notice where it disagrees with the fact, and write both down.

🔒 What you’ll build togetherUnlock by starting

A moveIn your notes, keep two columns: 'Did' and 'Said.' Never let a sentence live in both.

A moveWhen someone says 'I would use this,' ask instead: 'When did you last do something like this?' Anchor them to the past, not a promised future.

A moveWatch the hands before you trust the mouth. Note the hesitation, the backtrack, the abandoned click — before you ask why.

A moveWhen action and word conflict, write down both, but weight the action higher in your findings. The word tells you what they wish were true.

A moveRight after each session, before you analyze anything, ask yourself: what did I see with my eyes, and what did I only hear?

What changes unlock by starting

You stop treating user quotes as final verdicts on what to build.
Your reports clearly separate observed behavior from stated opinion — no more blending them into one story.
You can defend a design decision by pointing to what people did, not just what they claimed.
Stakeholders trust your findings more, because you show them the gap instead of hiding it.

One object, two jobs: a public answer to a real problem, and — the moment you start the chat — Aurelius’s live plan for your version of it.