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 Starbursting |  Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 Tage | 30-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | Based on research question | 3-10 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Information architectureNavigationFindability | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |