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 Personas |  UX Research Card Sorting |  UX Research Tree Testing |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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. | 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 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 20-45 min | 1-2 Tage | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | Based on research question | Based on research question | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | Information architectureNavigationStructure | Information architectureNavigationFindability | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |