Senior Design Expert - Paid AI Design Research Study

$150–250/hrrate as listed

Mercor is recruiting senior designers for a recorded research study with a major technology company building AI design tooling, capturing how expert designers reason about problems, craft quality, and ship readiness. Sessions run roughly 4–5 hours each including prep and review, at an observed rate of $250/hour, with scope and volume still being finalized.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.

What the work involves

This is a research study, not a labeling queue. The client wants a legible record of expert design thinking: how you frame an ambiguous problem, what specific signals separate strong craft from mediocre work, how you run or receive critique, and how you decide something is ready to ship versus needs another pass. That reasoning is captured in structured, recorded remote sessions. Depending on your background and fit, you may be the expert being interviewed, or the one conducting interviews with other senior designers — the second role requires you to probe, follow up, and keep a session on the rails without leading the answer.

Each task runs roughly 4–5 hours end to end: prep against a provided brief or artifact, the live recorded session itself, and a short structured review afterward. Volume is not guaranteed and the client is still finalizing structure, timing, and rate, so treat this as project-based rather than steady contract work.

What the platform screens for

Verifiable seniority. Mercor's screen is AI-led and asks for specifics — products you shipped, your actual scope of ownership, decisions you owned versus influenced. Vague titles do poorly under follow-up.
A shareable portfolio. A live website link is ideal. Portfolios are used only to assess fit for this study and are not used for model training. Submit only work you can share publicly; no confidential, unreleased, or NDA-covered material.
An articulated point of view. You should be able to say what "good" means in your discipline and defend it with examples, not adjectives. Screeners commonly ask you to critique a piece of work aloud.
Interview instinct, if you're considered for the interviewer track: comfort with silence, willingness to ask the second and third question, and restraint about inserting your own taste.

Logistics

Fully remote. Sessions are scheduled and recorded, so this is not fully async — expect to hold a 2–3 hour block at a time that overlaps with the study team, plus prep on your own schedule. Reliable audio, video, and screen sharing are required. Pay bands on this board reflect rates observed on listings at the time of posting and are not guaranteed; Mercor states the rate may change as the client finalizes scope.

What they look for

Senior-level design experience in product, UX, brand, or an adjacent craft discipline
Publicly shareable portfolio, ideally a live website link
Ability to articulate and defend a clear standard for design quality and critique
Comfort being recorded in structured remote interview sessions
Experience running or receiving formal design critique and ship-readiness reviews
Interviewing or facilitation experience (for the interviewer track)

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Do you have a minimum of five years of professional design experience (product, UX, web, brand, or adjacent craft discipline)?
Senior design experience · required
Do you have a portfolio website or public work samples you can share that are not under NDA or confidentiality agreement?
Shareable portfolio · required
Are you able to commit to at least one 4–5 hour block within the next [timeframe stated by Mercor], recorded, for a structured remote session?
Remote session availability · required
Can you articulate a clear point of view on what constitutes good design quality and shipping readiness in your discipline?
Design critique framework · preferred

0 of 4 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 10 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Whether you can articulate design rationale beyond aesthetic preference, and whether you see critique as data to integrate or noise to overcome.
A strong answer: Name a specific project, state the concrete disagreement (not 'they didn't get it'), explain the principle or user insight your design served, and show how you either convinced them or learned something that changed your thinking.
Where people lose it: Framing it as 'I was right and they learned to trust me' instead of showing how you reasoned through the tension—the study is about how expert designers think, not their authority.