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 |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. | When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 1-3 h | 1-5 Tage | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-12 | Nutzertraffic | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | KnowledgeMappingRisk | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |