Researcher
by training,
strategist
by instinct.

How I got here, and why I stay.

I came to research sideways. My first graduate degree was in immunology, a year in a lab in Manchester learning to ask a question precisely enough that the answer could be trusted. The questions I kept caring about turned out to be about people, not cells, so I went back for a second master's in Applied Cognition and Neuroscience, specializing in human–computer interaction and cognitive psychology, and never looked back.

Seven years later, I'm a Senior UX Researcher focused on Human–AI Interaction. For most of that time I was the founding researcher at Care.com, building the function from 0→1 on a two-sided platform serving 30M+ users, and running the studies myself while I stood it up. Player–coach by necessity and by preference: I'd rather design the conjoint study and teach a PM to run the next one than do either alone.

I believe the most valuable research is the kind that changes a decision, not the kind that confirms one. I lean qualitative to find the real question and quantitative to defend the answer: conjoint, MaxDiff, diary studies, behavioral experiments. The work I'm proudest of moved conversion +33% to +100% because it started from how people actually decide, not how we wished they would.

Lately my work centers on trust in AI-assisted experiences. My research surfaced what I call the authenticity paradox: the tension users feel between the efficiency of automation and their need for transparency and control. It's reshaped how the teams I work with think about AI adoption. I care a great deal about doing this responsibly: inclusive recruitment, honest data, and fairness assessments that hold up in front of a C-suite.

I'm based in Round Rock, Texas. The throughline from immunology to cognition to UX research is the same instinct: trust the evidence, and keep going one question past where the team stopped asking.