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 |  UX Research Card Sorting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 Tage | 4-5 Tage | 20-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | Based on research question | 5-8 | Based on research question |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Information architectureNavigationFindability | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | Information architectureNavigationStructure |