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 Usability Testing |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h je Session | 1-5 Tage | 45–90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | Nutzertraffic | 3-10 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationUXPrototype | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |