View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |  Product Discovery MVP Test Matrix |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. | When several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan. | When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 30-60 min je Interview | 45-75 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 5-12 Interviews | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments | Test Matrix, Test Plan | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |