View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | 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 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 30–60 min | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 4-8 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
