View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Pre-Mortem |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  UX Research User Interviews |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 20–45 min | 45–90 min | 30–60 min per interview | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | Small cross-functional group | 3-10 | 1 participant per interview | 4-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Risk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption log | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | RiskDecisionFailurePlanning | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |