top of page

AI STRATEGY

Design UX to Listen and Learn

Follow the Edits: Learn from What Users Change or Ignore

Watching how users interact with AI outputs—especially when they correct or delete them—reveals what the model gets wrong. These passive signals are often more reliable than active feedback.

Why it's Important
  • Surfaces silent dissatisfaction that feedback buttons miss

  • Helps improve models using real-world correction examples

  • Indicates which features may cause confusion or failure

  • Identifies usability issues and trust gaps

  • Provides training data without interrupting the user flow

How to Implement
  • Track whether users delete, override, or skip AI outputs

  • Compare final user version vs. AI-suggested version

  • Log time between output and user interaction

  • Use diffs or text similarity metrics to detect edits

  • Tag corrections by type (tone, accuracy, completeness)

  • Securely store edited content with opt-in and anonymization

  • Use corrections as part of reinforcement learning or fine-tuning

Available Workshops
  • Output vs. Edit Comparison Lab

  • Friction Log Mapping

  • Trust Breakage Scenario Review

  • Silent Signals Storyboarding

  • Correction Type Taxonomy Workshop

  • Skip Reason Brainstorm

Deliverables
  • Logging spec for correction/override events

  • Change detection script or diff utility

  • Taxonomy of common corrections

  • Dashboard of top-edited outputs

  • Sample dataset of user-edited outputs for model training

How to Measure
  • % of AI outputs edited or deleted

  • Edit frequency per user or feature

  • Common correction types (e.g., tone, fact error)

  • Time-to-edit after AI response

  • Skip rate per scenario

  • Similarity score between original and edited content

  • Correlation between edits and user satisfaction

Pro Tips
  • Combine passive edit logs with active thumbs down data

  • Use clustering to group similar types of edits

  • Review top-rejected outputs weekly

  • Highlight top corrections in team retrospectives

  • Create “correction of the week” for internal learning

Get It Right
  • Track both active and passive feedback

  • Include metadata for analysis (e.g., content type, persona)

  • Normalize logs for privacy and comparability

  • Use edits as training signals, not just errors

  • Flag frequent edits as candidates for improvement

Don't Make These Mistakes
  • Only focusing on explicit thumbs down

  • Failing to differentiate minor vs. major changes

  • Not aggregating corrections into themes

  • Ignoring high-skip outputs

  • Logging edits without user consent or anonymization

Fractional Executives

© 2025 MINDPOP Group

Terms and Conditions 

Thanks for subscribing to the newsletter!!

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
bottom of page