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 |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Test Card |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. | 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. | The Test Card turns a critical assumption into a testable claim and specifies in advance which result counts as success. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 30-60 min | 30–60 min per interview | 20-35 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 1-5 | 1 participant per interview | 1-5 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Test Card with a pre-set threshold |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis |