View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Product Strategy DIBB |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 1-2 h | 30–60 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 2-8 | 4-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |