methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of a participant using a prototype while an observer takes notes beside a highlighted usability issue.
UX Research
Usability Testing
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Paper illustration for Concierge MVP
Product Discovery
Concierge MVP
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Purposedifferent
When a product is built but people get stuck on tasks, usability testing shows the friction at concrete points. Observed use instead of self-report makes visible where orientation, understanding, or interaction breaks down.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.When an idea can first fail or grow through genuine hands-on support, it relies on manual work instead of automation. It shows whether user value holds up even under manual execution.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h je Session45–90 min1-4 Wochen30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question3-103-10 Kunden4-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Usability Issues, Severity List, RecommendationsTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasConcierge Learnings, Service Blueprint, MVP RisksEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
ValidationUXPrototype
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
MVPValidationServiceDiscovery
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
Add more methods