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 |  Innovation Crazy 8s |  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. | With only a few minutes available and a still-fuzzy solution search, the method forces a wide range of variants. It produces fast sketches before the first idea can settle in, making different directions directly comparable and open to further development. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 8-15 min | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 1-10 | 1 participant per interview |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Sketch Set, Idea Shortlist, Direction Options | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingSketchingSpeedDivergenceDesign sprint | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
