Portfolio research concept · Demonstration participants and findings

01 · Research plan

Start with behaviour, not a feature list.

The study was designed to understand how meal decisions are made across a week—and where current tools fail to support the messy reality.

OBJECTIVE

Understand the planning gap.

Explore how people decide, coordinate and adapt meals, with particular attention to the moments where effort becomes frustration or food becomes waste.

What triggers meal planning?Where do preferences become difficult?How are ingredients remembered and reused?What makes a plan flexible enough to survive?

METHOD MIX

6Semi-structured interviews
2Three-day diary studies
1Collaborative synthesis workshop

Participant frame

A range of planning contexts.

Profiles intentionally varied by household, confidence, dietary need and responsibility for planning.

01Solo professional

Plans loosely; often changes course after work.

02Young family

Balances children’s preferences with time and cost.

03Shared household

Coordinates meals through group messages.

04Confident cook

Plans around ingredients rather than recipes.

05Routine planner

Uses a repeated weekly template.

06Dietary constraint

Needs substitutions without extra searching.

07Budget focused

Plans around offers and ingredient reuse.

08Low-confidence cook

Needs reassurance and simple next steps.

Responsible assistance

Clear boundaries for AI.

Automation supported organisation and retrieval; it did not replace participant consent, researcher interpretation or validation.

✓

Data minimised

Only task-relevant, de-identified notes entered the synthesis workflow.

✓

Source linked

Every generated label retained a route back to the original observation.

✓

Human reviewed

Candidate clusters were accepted, changed or rejected by the researcher.

✓

Contradictions kept

Outliers and conflicting evidence remained visible rather than averaged away.

Next view

See how 136 notes became four themes.

Explore AI synthesis →