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 Surveys |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a topic needs to be validated broadly and many people can answer the same question, surveys gather structured feedback in a scalable form. Answers become comparable and segmentable instead of remaining merely anecdotal. | 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. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 3-14 Tage | 30–60 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional |
Participantsdifferent | 50+ | 4-8 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Survey Results, Charts, Segment Insights | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions |
Tagsno overlap | QuantitativeResearchValidation | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
