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 two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration for Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
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 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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.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
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30–60 min per interview30-60 min je Interview1-5 Tage45-75 min
Participantsdifferent
1 participant per interview5-12 InterviewsNutzertraffic2-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Interview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning DecisionTest Matrix, Test Plan
Tags1 shared
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions
Add more methods