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 |  UX Research Tree Testing |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Innovation Lotus Blossom |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 navigation exists but search paths still fail, tree testing checks findability without visual distraction. The method shows whether labels, levels, and paths really lead to the intended destination. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | When a central question feels too large, the method breaks it into neighboring topic fields with their own depth of ideation. It holds structure and openness at the same time, so adjacent perspectives don't get lost. This grows an idea space out of a core problem. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 Tage | 30-60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | Based on research question | 4-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Lotus Diagram, Idea Themes, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Information architectureNavigationFindability | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityDivergenceWorkshop |