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 |  Facilitation Mind Mapping |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. | 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 | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 15-45 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 | 1-10 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |