View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Kano Model |  UX Research User Interviews |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Product Discovery Hypothesis Prioritization Canvas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight. | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | 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 many hypotheses compete for attention, it brings order to their learning sequence and importance. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a prioritization canvas and a hypothesis backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 30–60 min per interview | 30–60 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 10-50 | 1 participant per interview | 4-8 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Prioritization Canvas, Hypothesis Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ExperimentsPrioritizationDiscoveryHypothesis |