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 |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |  UX Research Personas |  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. | When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 60-180 min | 1-3 Tage | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 4-20 | Internes Team | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ComplexitySensemakingDecision | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |