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 |  UX Research Surveys |  UX Research User Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 needs to be validated broadly and many people can answer the same question, surveys gather structured feedback in a scalable form. Answers become comparable and segmentable instead of remaining merely anecdotal. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 3-14 Tage | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 | 50+ | 1 participant per interview |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Survey Results, Charts, Segment Insights | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | QuantitativeResearchValidation | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |