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 User Interviews |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | 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 | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 45-60 min | 45-90 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |