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 |  UX Research User Interviews |  UX Research Tree Testing |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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 a navigation exists but search paths still fail, tree testing checks findability without visual distraction. The method shows whether labels, levels, and paths really lead to the intended destination. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 30–60 min per interview | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 1 participant per interview | Based on research question |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | Information architectureNavigationFindability |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
