Lyssna (formerly UsabilityHub) is a user research platform used to test digital products with real users and gain insights into their audience. Its tools and features help Lyssna to optimize users' designs and create more engaging user-friendly experiences. Lyssna is a research platform, offering a broad range of testing features including: Five Second Testing - Used to quickly test the effectiveness of landing pages, messaging and designs by showing users a…
$0
per month (3 seats included)
SurveyMonkey
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
SurveyMonkey provides free, customizable surveys, and a suite of paid, back-end programs that include data analysis, sample selection, bias elimination, and data representation tools. SurveyMonkey also offers large-scale, enterprise options for companies interested in data analysis, brand management, and consumer focused marketing.
$99
per month
UserTesting
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
UserTesting helps UX researchers, designers, product teams, and marketers gather actionable insights through research, testing, and feedback. With a network of real people ready to share their perspectives, UserTesting enables organizations to make customer-first decisions at scale.
N/A
Pricing
Lyssna
SurveyMonkey
UserTesting
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
3 seats included
Starter
$99
per month 5 seats included
Growth
$199
per month 15 seats included
Enterprise
Contact Sales
custom seats
Team Advantage
$25
per month (billed annually) per user (starting at 3 users)
Team Premier
$75
per month (billed annually) per user (starting at 3 users)
Standard Monthly
$99
per month
Individual Plan - Advantage Annual
$468
per year
Individual Plan - Premier Annual
$1,428
per year
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Lyssna
SurveyMonkey
UserTesting
Free Trial
Yes
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Discount available for annual plan. Panel responses are priced seperately.
Lyssna is certainly the least expensive, most basic and easy to use out of the range of usability tools I have used in the past. Depending on your maturity as a business and the projects that you are doing, this can be a great starting point before scaling up.
Survey Monkey is good for providing more quantatative results. It is quick and very easy to use with instant feedback as it is completed. There are no transcripts to deal with, checking through to make sure they have been annotated correctly.
Ease of use, features are consolidated in one platform versus the likes of Hotjar for example where it's one-sided in finding frictions on our user experience. Ethnio is another good tool however, there are 2 separate tools I have to use to get the scheduling and the actual …
UserTesting has far more features and allows us to view [participants'] videos and screens.
Verified User
Employee
Chose UserTesting
We have evaluated two other platforms - UserZoom and UsabilityHub. We ultimately decided to maintain our relationship with UserTesting due to the overall usability and the functionality that it offers. The features better suited our needs, and it met a price point that worked …
UserTesting is more robust. We also use UsabilityHub, but for different purposes - one off tests that don't require many screens but do require more responses.
UsabilityHub is well suited for remote unmoderated testing. Responses are captured very quickly and live updates allow the user to keep track of how the test is performing. The types of testing that make the most sense to use on UsabilityHub are preference test, first click test, navigational, and design surveys. It is less appropriate for one-on-one testing and lengthy questionnaires.
SurveyMonkey is well suited for external, professional, client-facing forms and complex question types. I've tried generating forms on HubSpot, and it's not nearly as intuitive or clean-looking, and not all question types are supported (e.g. Likert scales). For quick, internal forms that don't need to be as pretty or professional, I find that Google Forms is the quickest and easiest to pull together, especially since it has a single, universal respondent link. If I wanted to embed a link in a mass email, SurveyMonkey doesn't allow multiple respondents to use the same link on my plan.
UserTesting has been great for moderated customer interviews/usability testing as well as for unmoderated testing of messaging, imagery, prototypes and live experiences. I would say that the scope of what you want needs to be limited, as the participants are only paid so much and tests are supposed to not exceed a certain amount of time. For customer interviews, I think it can be difficult to onboard customers to UserTesting if they have never used it before. If I set up interviews, I don't even have them use the UserTesting scheduling tool, I actually set up all the interviews with the customers myself through the tool (being mindful of time zones!). When we run the meeting, they really don't even know UserTesting is involved. Might be nice for UserTesting to allow the upload/connecting to of a Zoom interview and let it do the transcription/analysis from there.
Being able to close the survey at a set time without having to remember to do so.
Takes the guess work out of response collecting.
Makes it easy to categorize responses within the same survey. Being able to add tags to open-ended questions makes it easy for us to identify patterns in responses.
An array of survey options and questions.
An all around great product that meets multiple needs.
Can have multiple collectors for the same survey to included manual input.
Add additional demographic sorting options for the audience to better meet the needs of B2B users - for example include industry type, functional area, etc.
I would like to have more customizable options for branding it to our hospital colors. Some survey options allow you to enter html color codes. SurveyMonkey allows you to change colors and you have to pick from selected options.
Embedding the surveys into a webpage, like WordPress is not as seamless as other services.
Sometimes there are restrictions around types of research that can be used for moderated user-testing with our own users.
For tests on relatively small areas of a website or app, the AI analysis seems rather overblown, like it's trying too hard to come up with something insightful when the test is actually about something quite small (e.g. structure of a mobile app menu).
It's difficult to invite our own users to unmoderated user-testing because they wouldn't know how the UserTesting interface works - this is particularly an issue for mobile research.
Compared to other competitors in the market (including a few I've used internally), if you're looking for a survey application, this one does the job and it's quite inexpensive too. Considering the fact that it comes with a handy mobile application too (on iOS and Android), you also get flexibility thrown in the deal too.
I'm very happy with my experience of the product and the level of service and learning resources they provide. If the service becomes more expensive than it currently is then we might not be able to justify additional cost - but this is theoretical. I would recommend UserTesting and would ideally renew our contract.
Due to its simplicity and design it is really easy to navigate. You can clearly understand which sections you have completed and which are still left to be done. It is also really easy to change ordering of content etc, which I have found hasn’t been an option in other tools which means it is a really lengthy task of rewriting all of the tasks or questions to get them in the correct order that is desired.
It does everything a survey software should do, and it does it very well. I can't speak for how well it would work for a business that was surveying tens of thousands of people - but for a small business of 50 employees with a couple of thousand clients, it does everything it needs to do.
It's very good, I have used other tools in the past and this is by far the most intuitive and user friendly. Testament to this is the ease with which other non researchers who have been onboarded to the tool with our additional seat have found it easy to use
I've never had to contact the SurveyMonkey customer care team directly, but they have a pretty good library of help articles on their website. Everything from designing and executing your survey to account and billing questions. I never had a need for further support from Survey Monkey.
I have contacted UserTesting's customer service online, by email, or by phone a few times, and each time, I have encountered the same professionalism and expertise. Even in person during a work event, they were there, and it was the same experience.
From a technical perspective, the implementation was extremely smooth. Most of the change management / implementation hurdles were clearing use of the tool through our various security, legal, and information privacy teams. Once these concerns were addressed (UserTesting.com was very helpful in providing all the needed documentation), the implementation process was very simple and we were able to get going right away.
UsabilityHub provides very fast, short responses to specific questions about a static image of a website. This is useful for checking what is most prominent on a page, what they would click on, what they see/read within the first 5 seconds of landing etc. WhatUsersDo is a broader tool, that records the screen and audio as a user navigates the website. You can set tasks and ask questions, but it much more about the user journey experience and their opinion, rather than testing a particular feature. Feedback also takes a bit longer. Hotjar is a combination of both, its a screen recording which helps you to see where users click and move to, but there is no audio or text feedback, just heatmaps/click maps for watching user behaviour.
SurveyMonkey is easier to customize and provides much more in depth analytics. SurveyMonkey also provides better templates providing us with a better presentation to our employees. SurveyMonkey also comes with a more trustworthy platform that ensures confidentiality, which is incredibly important to our employees and means we're getting more reliable results from the surveys.
The quality of the participants: they usually have good feedback and act like "professional" users. Which is good when we want a few insights in a short amount of time. Also, the interface is good. I miss having more features, like a good transcription tool like we have in Condens
The speed at which we can develop, program, execute and generate actual usable results provides significant value, particularly when we need fresh numbers to illustrate a point.
The fact that we can execute a research project so quickly means that new research is always a primary option when we're developing campaigns. That's a huge value proposition.