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 |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  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. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 2-4 h | 60-120 min | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-8 | 2-8 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |