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 |  Operations Root Cause Tree Analysis |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | For a problem with several suspected causes, the method builds a causal structure instead of a mere list. It makes visible how causes connect and where the strongest points of leverage lie. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 1-3 h | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 | 2-8 | 2-6 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Cause Tree, Evidence Notes, Countermeasures | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Root causeTreeIncidentQuality | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |