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 Customer Journey Mapping |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Architecture C4 Model |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately. | 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. | The C4 Model makes a system legible across several resolution levels, from context down to code. It suits situations where different audiences need to understand the same architecture from different altitudes. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 30–60 min | 1-4 h | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 4-8 | 1-5 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Context Diagram, Container Diagram, Component Diagram | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | JourneyServiceService design | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ArchitectureCommunicationVisualization | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |