Using AI for UX Work: Study GuideNielsen Norman Group
Design
NNG published a curated guide compiling their best resources on integrating AI into UX practice.
- What it is: A collection of NNG articles and videos on best practices for applying AI within UX workflows.
- Good for: Onboarding new team members or auditing whether your team's current AI usage matches established best practices.
- Why it matters: As AI tools proliferate in design workflows, having one vetted reference beats every designer inventing their own approach ad hoc.
For design
Worth circulating to your design org as a shared baseline before individual designers each freelance their own AI workflow standards.
Reading and writing are interfaces. And AI can reduce their friction.UX Collective
DesignProduct
A framing piece argues reading and writing are themselves interfaces AI can meaningfully de-friction.
- Core idea: Treats reading and writing as interfaces with their own frictions, positioning AI as a tool to reduce that friction, not just a chatbot.
- Reframe: Pushes designers to think about AI's role in textual interaction more broadly than the standard chat-box paradigm.
- Why it matters: Useful lens for teams designing AI reading/writing features that go beyond simple prompt-response boxes.
Why AI food looks like thatAI-generated food imagery in restaurant marketing is producing surreal, unappetizing results.
- The problem: Brands using generative image tools for food marketing are producing grotesque, physically-wrong visuals — donut shrimp, brain-like ice cream, stringy chicken.
- Why it happens: Models struggle badly with food texture and physics, and non-expert teams often don't catch the errors before publishing.
- Brand risk: Low-quality AI content quietly undermines brand trust and perceived quality.
- Why it matters: A cautionary tale for any organization rushing to cut costs with generative imagery without a real QA gate.
For design
If leadership is pushing AI-generated marketing assets to cut costs, this is a concrete example to bring to the table when arguing for a human quality-review checkpoint.