inVibe Agent works directly with your research data, study outputs, and supporting materials, applying the same methodologies our linguistic team uses in their own analysis. It helps you move from rich human responses to decisions you can defend, with findings tied to respondent evidence and a researcher reviewing the interpretation.
Use it when you need to work through a research question, compare perspectives, and develop a recommendation the broader team can use—not just get a quick summary.
Interested? Learn how to get started.
Watch the inVibe Agent Walkthrough
See the workflow from respondent reactions through language and voice analysis to a recommendation. The player’s timeline includes chapter markers for the introduction, qualitative analysis, language and voice analysis, and the recommendation.
Choose the Right Workflow
- Ask AI helps you explore research in the inVibe platform through questions, summaries, and cross-study conversations.
- inVibe Agent applies research methods in a layered analysis workflow, then helps turn reviewed findings into a usable deliverable, including an editable PowerPoint.
Start with a Research Question
Define the decision you need to make, the evidence to examine, and who will use the result. For example: which advertising concept should a creative team advance, and what should they revise?
Before starting, confirm with your inVibe team which research materials and analysis methods are available for your workflow. Identify the relevant studies, questions, and supporting materials rather than assuming every source is included.
The requests below illustrate a concept-comparison workflow. Adapt them to your research question and available evidence; they are not required commands or a promise of a particular result.
Compare What Respondents Said
Start with Qualitative Analysis: a structured read of reactions, overall impressions, likes, dislikes, perceived motivation, and the reasons behind stated preferences.
Compare reactions to the concepts in the selected study questions. Summarize what respondents liked and disliked, their stated preferences, and the reasons they gave. Include supporting quotes and source references, differing views, and gaps in the evidence reviewed.
Check the first read before moving deeper:
- Are the right questions and respondents represented?
- Do the cited responses support the summary?
- Are mixed reactions and disagreement visible?
- Does the evidence distinguish the concepts, or are the results close?
A close result is a reason to examine the evidence more carefully, not force a winner. Selected quotes alone do not establish how common a view is.
Go Deeper into Language and Voice
Linguistic Analysis examines wording, framing, certainty, and emphasis. It adds context to what respondents explicitly said without replacing the qualitative read.
Build on the qualitative analysis by examining wording, framing, certainty, and emphasis. Where does this add context to the stated preferences? Cite the supporting responses and distinguish observations from interpretations.
For eligible pre-segmented acoustic data, Speech Emotion Analysis adds observations about how a response sounds relative to that respondent’s baseline.
If eligible pre-segmented acoustic data is available, add baseline-relative vocal-posture observations to the analysis. Explain where they support or complicate the qualitative and linguistic findings, and identify limitations or missing evidence.
Acoustic observations do not prove an internal emotional state. Do not infer vocal posture from transcript wording alone or assume every study supports this analysis. If the required acoustic data is unavailable, keep the analysis within the available evidence.
These layers can help clarify a decision when the initial reactions are close, but they do not guarantee that one concept will emerge as the best choice.
Review Findings Against the Evidence
Supported findings are tied back to respondent evidence so you can validate the interpretation directly. Before using a recommendation:
- Follow the references. Read the cited response in context and check that quotes are accurate.
- Check the interpretation. Separate what respondents said from the analysis and any proposed action.
- Look for disagreement. Keep contrary examples, uncertainty, and missing evidence visible.
- Confirm the scope. Check which studies, questions, respondents, and analysis layers informed the result.
- Make the research judgment. Decide whether the evidence supports the recommendation or whether further work is needed.
The Agent supports researcher review; it does not replace it. Applying inVibe’s methods does not make every AI-generated interpretation correct.
Turn Reviewed Work into a Deliverable
Once you have reviewed the analysis, ask the Agent to shape it for your audience. The workflow can carry reviewed findings into a stakeholder-ready recommendation, including an editable PowerPoint.
Use the reviewed analysis to draft a five-slide recommendation for the creative team. Explain which concept the evidence supports advancing, what is working, what needs revision, and how the alternatives compare. Keep source references and important caveats. If the evidence does not support a clear choice, say so. Then create an editable PowerPoint from the reviewed slide content.
Review the final deliverable as well as the analysis. Make sure the slides preserve the evidence, uncertainty, and distinction between findings and recommendations. A polished deck is not a substitute for a checked interpretation.
Getting Started
inVibe Agent is currently in beta and isn’t automatically enabled on your account. Contact your inVibe account team or email support@invibe.co to request access or learn more.
You can also watch the demo or request a walkthrough.
For conversational exploration in the platform, see Ask AI.