Validation Lab
We benchmark synthetic research against real human studies.
Synthetic research is useful when it predicts what real humans actually say. Here we run the same study both ways and publish the comparison, including where synthetic falls short. No marketing math. No selective reporting.
Methodology
1. Run both studies
We run the same research question through Gather simulations (AI-generated audience responses) and through Gather's human research platform (real moderated interviews).2. Score correlation
We compare headline findings, top consensus themes, sentiment direction, and tension points. Correlation score reflects how often synthetic and human research reach the same conclusions.3. Publish honestly
We list specific agreements and disagreements. Where synthetic missed something the humans caught, we say so. Where synthetic caught a signal humans missed, we also say so.Published comparisons
First comparisons publishing soon.
No completed comparison has been published on this page yet. Contact Gather to discuss validation for your use case.
When not to trust synthetic research
Simulations help compare options and focus research. Results still need validation for the decision at hand. Some limits:
- Novel products or unfamiliar situations where observed customer behavior is not established.
- Deeply lived experience: medical decisions, grief, trauma, niche cultural context.
- Anything where the answer depends on what a real customer paid, signed, or actually did, not what they would say.
- Regulatory or legal decisions where precision is non-negotiable.
For these, run a real study on gatherhq.com.