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 Contextual Inquiry |  Decision Making Delphi Method |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 1-4 Wochen | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 6-30 Experten | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |