Mind maps are regarded as important auxiliary thinking tools and are widely used in the field of education to promote learners’ thinking organization and problem-solving abilities. This study adopted a single-factor between-group experimental design. A total of 54 technical vocational students were recruited and randomly assigned to 3 groups (18 people in each group). The experimental factors include 3 mind mapping software and 5 learning tasks (login system usage experience, basic chart design, interface exploration and customization functions, modification and editing tasks, advanced chart design). All students are divided into classes based on their results of the Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students to ensure that their basic abilities are consistent before the experiment. The results of this study highlight variances in learning outcomes across different mind mapping software: (1) When the Xmind functional interface is fully displayed, the overall user satisfaction is the highest and the system error performance is better than MindMeister and Coggle. (2) MindMeister has a high system error rate, which reduces testers’ willingness to use it. (3) Coggle is the most efficient in use, but it fails to receive high user satisfaction scores. These findings suggest that users value factors beyond time efficiency when evaluating software. The results of this study can be used as an important reference for the user interface design of digital mind mapping tools, helping to improve educational effectiveness.