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 Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic. | 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 | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 45–90 min | 60-180 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 | 4-20 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | ComplexitySensemakingDecision | SensemakingDecisionRationale |