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 Affinity Diagramming |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  UX Research Customer Journey Mapping |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 2-8 h | 2-4 h | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 5-12 | 4-10 | 4-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | JourneyServiceService design | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |