Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Get exclusive access to thought-provoking articles, bonus podcast content, and cutting-edge whitepapers. Become a member of the UX Magazine community today!

Home ›› UX Design ›› UX Research ›› Usability Tests vs. Focus Groups

Usability Tests vs. Focus Groups

by Paivi Salminen
2 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

It’s easy to confuse usability tests with focus groups. After all, both involve real users and valuable feedback. But in UX research, they answer very different questions. Focus groups reveal what people think and feel about an idea, while usability tests uncover how they actually use it. This article breaks down when and why to use each method so you can avoid common pitfalls, gather meaningful insights, and design products that not only meet user needs but work beautifully in practice.

If you’re new to UX, like me, it’s easy to mix up usability testing and focus groups. After all, both involve talking to real people, both generate insights, and both sound like something you’d do to “get user feedback”.

But here’s the truth: they serve totally different purposes, and if you use one when you actually need the other, you’ll end up answering the wrong questions.

Focus groups: opinions and feelings

A focus group brings a handful of people (usually 5-10) into a room to talk. You might ask them about their experiences with a product, their preferences, or how they feel about an idea or a brand.

The goal here isn’t to test your design, but to understand attitudes. Focus groups are great early on, when you’re trying to figure out what people care about, how they currently solve a problem, or whether your concept even makes sense to them.

Think of it as researching the “why” behind your users before you’ve built anything.

Usability tests: actions and behaviour

Usability tests, on the other hand, are all about watching people, one at a time, as they try to complete tasks with your design. That might be a live website, a prototype, or even paper sketches.

Instead of asking “What do you think of this?”, you ask “Can you figure out how to do this?”

The magic happens in the moments when users hesitate, get lost, or say, “Wait, what am I supposed to click?” That’s where you uncover friction, the small details that make the difference between a smooth experience and a frustrating one.

When to use each

  • Focus groups are for before you design, when you’re exploring what to build and what people want.
  • Usability tests are for during and after you design, when you’re checking if what you built actually works.

Both are valuable, but they answer different questions: Focus groups tell you if you’re building the right thing, Usability tests tell you if you built it the right way.

Key takeaway

Don’t fall into the trap of treating focus groups as usability tests. Listening to people talk about what they might do is not the same as watching them actually do it.

As Steve Krug puts it in his book Don’t Make Me Think, the real insight comes not from opinions, but from observing behaviour.

You say “potato”, I say “focus group”.

The article originally appeared on Substack.

Featured image courtesy: UX Indonesia.

post authorPaivi Salminen

Paivi Salminen
Päivi Salminen, MSc, is a digital health innovator turned researcher with over a decade of experience driving growth and innovation across start-ups and international R&D projects. After years in the industry, she has recently transitioned into academia to explore how user experience and design thinking can create more equitable and impactful healthcare solutions. Her work bridges business strategy, technology, and empathy, aiming to turn patient and clinician insights into sustainable innovations that truly make a difference.

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print
Ideas In Brief
  • The article distinguishes between usability tests and focus groups, highlighting their different roles in UX research.
  • It explains that focus groups gather opinions and attitudes, while usability tests observe real user behavior to find design issues.
  • The piece stresses using each method at the right stage to build the right product and ensure a better user experience.

Related Articles

UX isn’t just about screens — it’s about feelings. This article explores why the future of UX depends on blending artificial and emotional intelligence to create truly human experiences.

Article by Krystian M. Frahn
UX is More Than Screens: The Art of Designing Emotions
  • The article shows how Steve Jobs’ shift from “form follows function” to “form follows emotion” transformed design into a deeply human practice centered on empathy.
  • It explains that emotions drive perception, usability, and loyalty — making emotional intelligence essential to meaningful user experiences.
  • The piece argues that the future of UX lies in uniting artificial and emotional intelligence to create technology that feels truly human.
Share:UX is More Than Screens: The Art of Designing Emotions
6 min read

Lean UX and User-Centered Design share the same heart — empathy for users — but differ in pace and practice. This piece shows how Lean UX turns UCD principles into a faster, data-driven approach for modern teams.

Article by Paivi Salminen
Lean UX vs. User-Centered Design
  • The article explains that while both Lean UX and User-Centered Design focus on users, Lean UX adapts UCD principles for speed, collaboration, and rapid learning.
  • It argues that Lean UX evolves user-centered thinking into an agile, data-driven process that helps teams design the right thing faster.
Share:Lean UX vs. User-Centered Design
3 min read

When a traveler loses her bag, a simple UX flaw turns inconvenience into chaos. What if smart design and AI could turn that moment into a story of trust instead?

Article by Krystian M. Frahn
UX Promptly Needed: a Railway Digital Transformation Story
  • The article shows how poor UX design in railway lost and found systems creates frustration and inefficiency for passengers and staff.
  • It argues that applying human-centered design and AI-powered tools, such as QR-based tracking and digital reporting, could transform the process into a seamless, trust-building experience.
Share:UX Promptly Needed: a Railway Digital Transformation Story
3 min read

Join the UX Magazine community!

Stay informed with exclusive content on the intersection of UX, AI agents, and agentic automation—essential reading for future-focused professionals.

Hello!

You're officially a member of the UX Magazine Community.
We're excited to have you with us!

Thank you!

To begin viewing member content, please verify your email.

Get Paid to Test AI Products

Earn an average of $100 per test by reviewing AI-first product experiences and sharing your feedback.

    Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

      This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and