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 |  Architecture Architecture Inception Canvas |  UX Design Customer Journey Canvas |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | The Architecture Inception Canvas bundles the first architecture questions into a compact decision picture. It fits when an initiative is still in motion but still needs clear guardrails. | When a journey needs to be understood across several phases, it arranges experience, touchpoints, and opportunities into one picture. It makes gaps and friction along the user path clear. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 h | 1-3 h | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-8 | 3-10 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Inception Canvas, Risks, Goal List, Open Questions | Customer Journey Canvas, Pain Points, Experience Opportunities | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | AlignmentArchitectureCanvas | JourneyCustomerService designCanvas | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |