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 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 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-2 Tage | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | Based on research question | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | Information architectureNavigationFindability | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
