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 Usability Testing |  UX Research Personas |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Innovation Design Sprint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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 the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h je Session | 1-3 Tage | 30–60 min | 4-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | Internes Team | 4-8 | 5-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationUXPrototype | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation |