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 |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  Innovation Design Sprint |  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 a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | When the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | 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 | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 2-8 h | 4-5 Tage | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 5-12 | 5-8 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |