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 Contextual Inquiry |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 1-8 | 2-8 | 1-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | SensemakingDecisionRationale |