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 Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Operations Kepner-Tregoe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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 an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | For a disturbance that's hard to pin down, the method cleanly separates problem, cause, and decision. It reduces mixing when symptoms allow several interpretations. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 30-90 min | 2-8 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Problem Analysis, Decision Analysis, Risk Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | Problem solvingRoot causeDecisionOperations |