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 Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Usability Testing |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | When a product is built but people get stuck on tasks, usability testing shows the friction at concrete points. Observed use instead of self-report makes visible where orientation, understanding, or interaction breaks down. | 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 | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 h je Session | 1-5 Tage | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | Based on research question | Nutzertraffic | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ValidationUXPrototype | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |