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 Personas |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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 teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | 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 | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-5 Tage | 30–60 min per interview | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | Nutzertraffic | 1 participant per interview | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |