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 |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Decision Making Cynefin Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-2 h | 1-3 h | 60-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 1-8 | 1-8 | 4-20 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Cynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ComplexitySensemakingDecision |