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 Affinity Diagramming |  UX Research User Interviews |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Systems Thinking Current Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 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. | When an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 30–60 min per interview | 30-90 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality |