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 |  Decision Making Red Teaming |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  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. | For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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 | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-4 h | 45-60 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-8 | 2-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Challenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation Plan | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | RiskDecisionSensemaking | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |