What is synthetic research?

Synthetic research uses AI-powered personas that simulate how real buyers, customers, or market segments would respond to your research questions. It produces directional signal — insights to sharpen your hypotheses — before you invest in real primary fieldwork. Gather Synthetic runs AI-moderated interviews across any audience archetype in minutes, not weeks.

How is synthetic research different from real research?

Synthetic research generates directional signal using AI personas, while real primary research collects data from actual people. Synthetic pre-research is faster (minutes vs. weeks), cheaper, and ideal for hypothesis generation and stakeholder alignment. It is not statistically valid and should be used to focus and prioritize real fieldwork, not replace it. Gather offers both synthetic pre-research and real AI-moderated interviews with actual respondents.

What types of research can Gather Synthetic run?

Gather Synthetic supports 14 study types: Brand Perception, Product Feedback, Concept Testing, Competitive Intelligence, CX/NPS Deep Dive, Messaging & Claims Testing, Win/Loss Analysis, Market Segmentation, Pricing Research, Ad & Creative Testing, Customer Journey Mapping, Feature Prioritization, Churn & Retention Analysis, and Audience Discovery.

How much does synthetic research cost?

The first 5 synthetic interviews are free. After that, B2C audience interviews cost $0.50 each and B2B audience interviews cost $5.00 each. There is no subscription required.

How accurate is synthetic research?

Synthetic research is directional, not statistically accurate. Predictive accuracy and a statistical interval are only shown when established for the specific result. Treat findings as educated hypotheses to validate with real primary research, not as definitive measurements.

← All brands

Scheduling automation & lead routing · PUBLIC RESEARCH BRIEF

CalendlyWhich scheduling rule removes friction without sending the wrong lead?

Calendly's current scheduling page describes connected calendars, availability controls, one-to-one and multi-person event types, team templates, admin controls, routing forms, meeting distribution, reminders, follow-ups and integrations. This brief studies how teams balance invitee ease, routing accuracy and owner control without assuming that more booked meetings are better meetings.

Updated 2026-09-27 · Simulation results not yet generated

Test a question in Gather ↗Explore fictional demo →

CHANGE ONE THING. LEARN WHAT MATTERS.

Three questions for the GTM team.

For a Calendly lead-routing form, would asking every qualification question before showing times or revealing an eligible meeting first and collecting secondary details afterward produce the more accurate and acceptable booking flow? Use synthetic leads with fixed routing outcomes.

Set up this study →

When several teammates could host a meeting, would a transparent host-selection explanation or a simple confirmed-time view create more invitee trust without encouraging channel shopping? Hold availability and assignment rules constant.

Set up this study →

For a high-value meeting, would a single reminder with a clear reschedule path or a short sequence of reminders reduce avoidable misses without creating message fatigue? Test preference and comprehension only; do not send live reminders.

Set up this study →

PROPOSED AUDIENCE

Who should weigh in?

North American B2B revenue, recruiting, customer-success and professional-services teams evaluating or using Calendly. Include invitees, sales and success representatives, recruiters, team managers, operations owners and administrators. Recruit authorized adult participants. Proposed audience; no meeting-volume, conversion or productivity outcome is implied.

TWO TIME HORIZONS

Trial today. A habit tomorrow?

Near term · 0–90 days

Over 0–90 days, run sandbox booking, routing, rescheduling and reminder tasks with synthetic calendars, leads and availability. Measure routing accuracy, abandoned steps, rule comprehension, inappropriate host assignment, reschedule success and preference across variants. Do not create live meetings or contact invitees.

Longer term · 3–12 months

Over 3–12 months, follow approved teams as territories, ownership, calendars and event types change. Examine stale routes, uneven assignment, exception handling, no-shows, rescheduling loops and administrator maintenance. Conversion, attendance or time-saved claims require observed comparable meetings and business outcomes.

What would make the result actionable?

Use versioned routing and availability rules, synthetic contact records, known-correct host assignments and independently adjudicated outcomes. Include conflicts, ownership changes, inaccessible times and no-eligible-host cases. Keep tests in a sandbox and separate stated preference from observed booking behavior.

A Gather simulation returns hypothetical customer reactions. Quantifying revenue, traffic or retention needs actual business inputs and validation against observed behavior.

About Calendly

Visit the company website ↗