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 Tree Testing |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Innovation Brainstorming |  Innovation Design Charrette |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 Tage | 30–60 min | 30-60 min | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 4-8 | 4-12 | 10-50 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationFindability | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation |