research methods
Empathy map
What is an empathy map and what is it for?
An empathy map is a simple four-quadrant canvas - says, thinks, does, feels - for organising what you've learned about a user into one shared picture. It's a synthesis tool: you take scattered research observations and sort them into those quadrants, so a team builds a common, evidence-based sense of the person rather than each member imagining a different one.
Also known as: empathy map, empathy mapping, says thinks does feels
The demo
Raw observations from one user session, jumbled up. Click each to file it under what they said, thought, did or felt - and watch a portrait take shape.
What this demo shows (text version)
A four-quadrant empathy map (says, thinks, does, feels) starts empty, with a row of raw observations from a user session: a quote they said aloud, something they clearly thought, an action they took, and an emotion they showed. Clicking each observation files it into its matching quadrant, gradually building the map.
Assembled, the map reveals the tensions a flat list hides - notably the gap between a polite "it's fine, I'll manage" (says) and the backtracking and frustration (does, feels) underneath. That's the value of the tool: it synthesises scattered evidence into a shared, four-angle picture of a real person, and surfaces the contradictions worth designing for. It only works built from genuine research, not from the team's assumptions.
An empathy map turns a pile of research notes into a shared view of a user across four lenses - what they say, think, do and feel. Its value is the gaps it exposes: the mismatch between what people say and what they actually do, and the feelings driving both. Build it from real observations, not assumptions, and use it to align a team and spot needs - not as a substitute for actually talking to users.
Drop each raw quote into its quadrant and a scatter of observations becomes a portrait: what they said out loud, what they were really thinking, what they did, and how they felt. The tensions jump out - the cheerful "it's fine" sitting above a frustrated "feels" - which is exactly the insight a list of notes would have buried.
The four quadrants each capture a different layer. Says is direct quotes; thinks is what they believe but may not voice; does is observed behaviour; feels is the emotional state. The richest findings live in the contradictions between them - the user who says the process is "easy" (says) while sighing and backtracking (does/feels) is telling you something a satisfaction score never would.
It works as synthesis and alignment. After interviews or sessions, sorting observations into the map forces a team to ground their mental model in actual evidence and converge on one shared understanding - instead of each person carrying a private, conflicting idea of "the user". It pairs naturally with personas and journey maps as the raw material that feeds them.
The failure mode is filling it from imagination. An empathy map built on "users probably think…" just launders the team's assumptions into an official-looking artefact - false consensus with a template. It's only as good as the real research behind it, and it complements talking to users; it never replaces it.