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 Tree Testing |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 3-14 Tage | 1-2 Tage | 30–60 min | Mehrere Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 50+ | Based on research question | 4-8 | 2-6 researchers plus sample |
Formatdifferent | Async | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Survey Results, Charts, Segment Insights | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses |
Tagsno overlap | QuantitativeResearchValidation | Information architectureNavigationFindability | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative |