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 Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|
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 the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 Tage | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | Based on research question | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Information architectureNavigationFindability | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
