View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Operations 5 Whys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Concept Mapping arranges terms and relationships in a network that makes subject-matter connections tangible. It fits when a topic needs to be understood structurally rather than linearly. | 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. | 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. | For a single, hard-to-explain deviation, the method exposes the causal chain behind the visible symptom. It keeps the cause open until a controllable condition emerges instead of a mere description. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 4-8 | 3-10 | 2-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Root cause notes, Countermeasures |
Tagsno overlap | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Root causeIncidentLeanProblem solving |