View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Iceberg Model |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Systems Thinking Current Reality Tree |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Iceberg Model separates visible events from patterns, structures, and mental models. This turns a single observation into a deeper understanding of why a problem keeps recurring. | 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. | A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 30–60 min | 2-6 h | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 4-8 | 3-8 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Iceberg Worksheet, Pattern Notes, Intervention Ideas | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingRoot causePatterns | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |