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 |  UX Research User Interviews |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | 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 | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h je Session | 30–60 min per interview | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 1 participant per interview | 4-10 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationUXPrototype | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |