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 Solution 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 a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation. | 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 | 5-10 Interviews | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation Notes | Test Matrix, Test Plan | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ValidationInterviewsPrototype | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |