I agree on everything, especially on "people inside of UX" which for me is the main problem.

When UX is understood as web design, many things can happen.

I worked/working/keeping business contacts with 4 EU countries, in many cases their design teams are made of former web designers, graphic designers or people that come from the art academy and that didn't study UX nor from where it comes.

UX is literally understood as "the experience of the user" and not for the type of scientific knowledge required to perform it.

In these scenarios, the designer is the job of a bricklayer and qualitative research either understood as something to be done at the beginning of a project (eg the launch of the whole product) or is given in the hands of others, C-levels or Product Managers.

Quantitative research is conducted, typically through usability tests and A/B test but, usability tests are mainly used to spot errors, not also to study memorability and learnability.

A/B tests also, usually conducted by others, are always missing the statistic significance, because nobody knows what it is, and nobody knows because the "UX principles" that often are placed as requirements in the job ads that i see in DE, IT, ES and GR and that could be the only signal for "we know the difference between UX and web design" are often assimilated by osmosis rather than studied, so if the designer was not exposed to these things by being in contact with a colleague aware of them, they are never absorbed.