View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Solution Interview |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research User Interviews |  Product Discovery Problem Interview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation. | 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 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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min je Interview | 30–60 min | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min je Interview |
Participantsdifferent | 5-10 Interviews | 4-8 | 1 participant per interview | 5-12 Interviews |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation Notes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Problem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer Segments |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationInterviewsPrototype | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DiscoveryInterviewsValidation |