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 Card Sorting |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Innovation Lotus Blossom |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. | 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 a central question feels too large, the method breaks it into neighboring topic fields with their own depth of ideation. It holds structure and openness at the same time, so adjacent perspectives don't get lost. This grows an idea space out of a core problem. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 30–60 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 4-8 | 3-10 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Lotus Diagram, Idea Themes, Shortlist | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationStructure | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityDivergenceWorkshop | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |