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 Design Charrette |  Innovation Starbursting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. | Helps clarify ideas, open questions, and testable next steps in concrete terms. It opens the thinking space, collects ideas, and leads to testable options. The result is captured as a star-shaped question map, question list, and assumption list. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 Tage | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | Based on research question | 10-50 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Information architectureNavigationFindability | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery |