behavioural research
Behavioural Research for Insurance Aggregators
Aggregator journeys live or die on the quote funnel. OpenScouter runs remote behavioural sessions with neurodivergent users on your real flow, then correlates voice, interaction signals, and facial expression to show exactly where comparison breaks down.
The funnel step that quietly costs you conversions
For most insurance aggregators, the break point is not the landing page. It is the quote form itself, the moment a user has to declare occupation, no-claims history, modifications, or named drivers, and the results page where dozens of policies are ranked by headline premium. Drop-off here is the single biggest determinant of commercial outcome, and it rarely shows up cleanly in analytics.
Standard tools tell you that users abandoned at step three of the quote form. They do not tell you why a dyslexic user re-read the occupation dropdown four times, why an autistic user stalled on an ambiguous question about business use, or why an ADHD user clicked the cheapest result without opening the policy detail.
Behavioural research is the diagnostic method that closes that gap. Watching real users reason aloud through a motor quote, a home contents comparison, or a life cover funnel surfaces the friction that aggregate numbers hide, and connects it to the specific question, label, or filter that needs rewriting.
Our approach
Three streams on the live quote journey
We run remote sessions on your actual aggregator funnel, from landing through quote form to results and click-out. Voice, click and scroll signals, and on-device facial expression are captured in parallel so we can show which question wording caused hesitation, not just where users dropped.
A neurodivergent panel as a usability amplifier
Testers with ADHD, autism, dyslexia, and low vision tend to expose ambiguous quote questions, dense policy summaries, and cluttered results tables that neurotypical users push through silently. For aggregators, that is a higher-signal panel for the exact cognitive load points that matter.
Findings mapped to FCA Consumer Duty expectations
FCA Consumer Duty (PS22/9) applies to FCA-regulated firms operating aggregator services in the UK, including the consumer understanding outcome. We tag each finding to the relevant outcome so your compliance and design teams can act on the same evidence base.
The FCA found that price comparison websites in general insurance can lead consumers to focus on headline price at the expense of policy detail, with implications for the duty of clear communication
For insurance aggregators specifically, this 2014 FCA thematic review remains the most directly relevant regulator statement on the category. It names the exact behavioural pattern the comparison model encourages, anchoring on headline premium while skimming policy detail, and links it to the duty of clear communication that now sits inside the FCA Consumer Duty (PS22/9) consumer understanding outcome for FCA-regulated firms. Behavioural research on the live quote and results journey is how aggregators evidence that users actually understand what they are buying, not just that they clicked the cheapest tile.
What you receive
- A funnel-stage report covering landing, quote form, results table, policy detail, and click-out, with friction ranked by behavioural evidence
- Annotated session clips showing voice, click behaviour, and facial expression at each break point on your live journey
- A question-by-question review of your quote form flagging items that triggered re-reads, hesitations, or misinterpretation
- A consumer understanding mapping aligned to the FCA Consumer Duty outcomes for FCA-regulated aggregator firms
- A prioritised remediation list separating wording fixes, layout fixes, and deeper journey changes, human-confirmed before delivery
Frequently asked
- Do you test the full aggregator journey or just the results page?
- Both. We typically scope sessions across landing, quote form, results comparison, policy detail, and click-out to the provider, because the behavioural break point is often upstream of where analytics flags drop-off.
- How does this sit alongside Hotjar, Maze, or our in-house research team?
- It complements them. Hotjar and Maze tell you what happened at scale. OpenScouter tells you why, with voice, interaction, and facial expression correlated on a smaller, deliberately neurodivergent sample. Your in-house team owns the design response.
- Is the facial expression capture sent to the cloud?
- No. Facial expression is processed locally on the participant's device via on-device computer vision. Only derived signals are correlated with voice and interaction data in the report pipeline.
- Can findings be used as evidence for FCA Consumer Duty reviews?
- Our reports are behavioural evidence, not legal opinion. For FCA-regulated aggregator firms, the findings can feed your consumer understanding and consumer support outcome monitoring under Consumer Duty (PS22/9), alongside your existing governance.
- How quickly do you turn round a study?
- From signed brief to human-confirmed report is typically days, not months. Exact timing depends on panel match for the specific product line, motor, home, life, travel, or pet.
Keep reading
Talk to a behavioural researcher
Tell us about the vertical, the journey, and the evidence you need. We will scope a pilot in days, not weeks.