View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture C4 Model |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research User Interviews |  UX Research Personas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | 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. | 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 target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-4 h | 30–60 min | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 | 4-8 | 1 participant per interview | Internes Team |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ResearchCustomerSynthesis |