All templates

Identity Verification Friction & Trust Assessment

Measures ease, clarity, trust, and drop-off points across KYC/AML identity verification flows. Designed for compliance, product, and UX teams seeking to reduce verification abandonment and improve onboarding completion rates.

Sample questions

A preview of what’s in the template. Every question is editable before you launch.

26 questions · ~11 min
Q01
Message

Welcome to this survey about your identity verification experience. This survey takes approximately 12 minutes and is completely voluntary — you may stop at any time. There are no right or wrong answers; we are interested in your honest opinions. Your responses are confidential and will be reported only in aggregate to help us improve our verification process. No individual responses will be shared externally.

Q02
Dropdown

In the past 6 months, how often have you used online or mobile financial services?

  • Daily
  • Weekly
  • Monthly
  • Less than monthly
  • Not at all
Q03
Opinion Scale

The instructions at each step were clear and easy to follow.

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q04
Multiple Choice

Which, if any, issues did you encounter during verification? Select all that apply.

  • Document upload failed
  • Photo quality was rejected
  • Camera or device didn't work as expected
  • Address verification failed
  • Name mismatch between documents
  • Liveness/face check was confusing
  • Unclear which documents were acceptable
  • Timeouts or connection problems
  • Concerns about data privacy
  • None of the above
Q05
Opinion Scale

How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the help or guidance available during verification?

Scale: 17
Min:Very dissatisfiedMax:Very satisfied
Q06
Opinion Scale

How confident are you that your personal data is handled securely during the verification process?

Scale: 15
Min:Not at all confidentMax:Extremely confident
Q07
Dropdown

What is your age group?

  • 18–24
  • 25–34
  • 35–44
  • 45–54
  • 55–64
  • 65+
  • Prefer not to say
Q08
Long Text

Based on your responses in this survey, please share any additional thoughts or feelings about the verification experience.

Q09
Multiple Choice

Where did you complete your most recent identity verification with us?

  • Mobile app
  • Desktop website
  • In-branch
  • Phone support
  • Third-party link/integration
  • Not sure
Q10
Opinion Scale

I understood which documents were required before I began.

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q11
AI Interview

We'd like to understand more about any friction or difficulties you experienced during verification. Please share what happened, and we may ask a few follow-up questions.

Q12
Multiple Choice

Which help resources did you use, if any? Select all that apply.

  • In-app tips or tooltips
  • Step-by-step guide
  • Live chat
  • Phone support
  • Email support
  • FAQ/Help center
  • None of the above
Q13
Ranking

Please rank the following areas from where improvement would help you most to least.

  1. Instructions and clarity
  2. Technical stability and speed
  3. Photo/document capture quality
  4. Identity matching and verification accuracy
  5. Help and support
  6. Privacy and transparency
Drag to rank
Q14
Multiple Choice

How do you describe your gender?

  • Woman
  • Man
  • Non-binary
  • Prefer not to say
Q15
Message

Thank you for your time — your feedback will directly help us improve the verification experience for everyone.

Q16
Dropdown

Approximately when did that verification take place?

  • Within the last 7 days
  • 8–30 days ago
  • 1–3 months ago
  • 4–6 months ago
  • More than 6 months ago
  • Not sure
Q17
Opinion Scale

I knew what to expect in terms of the steps involved and how long it would take.

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q18
Ranking

Please rank the following from most to least disruptive to your verification experience.

  1. Unclear instructions
  2. Technical errors
  3. Strict photo/document quality requirements
  4. Identity match failures
  5. Waiting for manual review
  6. Privacy concerns
Drag to rank
Q19
Opinion Scale

If you needed to verify your identity with us again, how likely would you be to complete the process?

Scale: 17
Min:Not at all likelyMax:Extremely likely
Q20
Dropdown

Where do you primarily reside?

  • United States
  • United Kingdom
  • Canada
  • Australia
  • European Union
  • Other/Rest of world
  • Prefer not to say
Q21
Multiple Choice

Did you complete the verification in one sitting?

  • Yes, completed on the first attempt
  • Yes, but it took multiple attempts
  • No, I could not complete it
  • I started but plan to finish later
Q22
Opinion Scale

When something went wrong, the error messages helped me understand what to do next.

Scale: 17
Min:Strongly disagreeMax:Strongly agree
Q23
Dropdown

What is the highest level of education you have completed?

  • Less than high school
  • High school or equivalent
  • Some college/Associate
  • Bachelor's degree
  • Master's degree
  • Doctorate
  • Professional degree (e.g., JD, MD)
  • Prefer not to say
Q24
Dropdown

Approximately how long did the verification take in total?

  • Less than 2 minutes
  • 2–5 minutes
  • 6–10 minutes
  • 11–20 minutes
  • More than 20 minutes
  • Not sure
Q25
Dropdown

What is your current employment status?

  • Employed full-time
  • Employed part-time
  • Self-employed
  • Unemployed and looking for work
  • Not employed and not seeking
  • Student
  • Retired
  • Prefer not to say
Q26
Opinion Scale

Overall, how easy or difficult was the verification process?

Scale: 17
Min:Very difficultMax:Very easy

What’s included

  • AI follow-ups

    Adaptive probes on open-ended answers that pull out detail a static form would miss.

  • Attention checks

    Built-in safeguards against rushed answers and low-quality respondents.

  • AI-drafted copy

    Wording, ordering, and branching written by the AI — tuned to your research goal.

  • Auto report

    Themes, quotes, and a plain-English summary write themselves once responses come in.

How it compares

We reviewed the closest templates from other survey tools. Here’s what they do well — and where this template goes further.

Why this template

  • Goes beyond static satisfaction ratings by including an AI follow-up interview that probes deeper into specific friction points or difficulties a respondent mentions during verification.
  • Combines quantitative measures (clarity, confidence in data security, ease-of-use scales) with ranking questions that pinpoint which friction sources and improvement areas matter most.
  • Captures process-level context (channel used, time taken, whether completed in one sitting, specific errors encountered) so compliance/product teams can localize drop-off causes, not just overall sentiment.
  • Closes with an open-text reflection prompt and auto-generated reporting, turning raw responses into structured findings without manual coding.

Jotform

Identity Verification Form Template

A static intake-style form for collecting identity verification submissions (e.g., document upload, personal details) rather than a survey measuring user experience or friction. Useful as a data-collection form, not as an instrument for assessing trust, clarity, or drop-off causes. No interview or follow-up mechanism is present.

What it does well

  • Simple, ready-to-use form structure for collecting verification submissions
  • Likely supports file/document upload fields common to KYC intake
  • Easy to customize within Jotform's drag-and-drop builder

Where it falls short

  • No adaptive AI follow-up questioning to explore why friction occurred
  • Not designed to measure experience-level constructs like trust, clarity, or satisfaction
  • No automated per-response quality scoring or auto-generated analysis reports

Typeform

Identity Verification Form Template

A conversational-style static form for capturing identity verification information, benefiting from Typeform's clean one-question-at-a-time UI. It is built for data intake rather than for evaluating verification friction, trust, or abandonment points across a flow. No mechanism for deeper qualitative probing exists.

What it does well

  • Polished, respondent-friendly one-question-at-a-time interface
  • Simple branching logic available for basic conditional paths
  • Fast to deploy for straightforward identity data collection

Where it falls short

  • Lacks adaptive AI interviewing to dig into specific pain points respondents mention
  • No built-in voice interview option or guided screen-share task capability
  • No transparent prompt methodology or automated quality scoring of responses

Ready to launch?

Open this template in the editor. Every part is yours to change before the first respondent sees it.