methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of a participant using a prototype while an observer takes notes beside a highlighted usability issue.
UX Research
Usability Testing
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration for Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door Test
Paper illustration of MVP Test Matrix with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
MVP Test Matrix
Purposedifferent
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 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 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.When several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h je Session30–60 min1-5 Tage45-75 min
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question4-8Nutzertraffic2-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Usability Issues, Severity List, RecommendationsEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning DecisionTest Matrix, Test Plan
Tagsno overlap
ValidationUXPrototype
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions
Add more methods