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 Empathy Mapping |  UX Research First-click Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 users immediately turn the wrong way on a screen or wireframe, first click testing checks initial orientation at high speed. The first click shows early whether expectation, labeling, and wayfinding fit together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-2 Tage | 30–60 min | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | Based on research question | 4-8 | 10-30 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Click Heatmap, Success Rate, Design Recommendations |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | Information architectureNavigationFindability | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | UXNavigationFindabilityValidation |