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 User Interviews |  Delivery RAID Log |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 45–90 min | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-10 | 4-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |