If you’ve read our blog post on problem statement vs the hypothesis

The Clickbait Effect
This trend is often seen when you have encouraged more users to progress further in the journey than typically intended. This is the opposite of the qualifying effect. The clickbait effect pushes more users down the funnel, even though they have no intention of completing the desired action. This means you usually see a massive increase in users at early stages of the funnel, but then a sudden drop later in the funnel as any unqualified leads leave the website.
The Flat Result
This is quite possibly the worst possible pattern you could see. Essentially, a flat result would suggest that your changes had no significant impact on your users. Results are often so scattered that you wouldn’t be able to gain any insights into your users’ behaviour.

5. Challenge your interpretation

Whilst the easiest route is to find ways to interpret your data so it works with your original hypothesis, you should try your best to challenge your analysis and theories to ensure you haven’t misinterpreted the results. Getting your evaluations peer-reviewed can be a great way of gaining a fresh perspective. Someone from your UX or CX department could be best for this as they are usually highly informed about your customers.
Getting a second opinion can reduce cognitive bias and even shed light on different stories or explanations you might not have considered. At CCX, what we find is that this often leads to further questions and therefore more tests.
Of course, we understand that this process isn’t for everyone. If you need any guidance in how best to analyse your experimentations, feel free to reach out on LinkedIn or use the contact form on our website.