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 Pretotyping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data. | 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. | When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | Stunden bis wenige Tage | 45–90 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 1-4 | 3-10 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decision | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ValidationDemandMVP | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth |