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 Tree Testing |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 45-60 min | 1-5 Tage | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationFindability | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |