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 Personas |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Operations Causal Factor Analysis |  UX Research User Interviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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 an event with a complicated course, the method breaks down the contributing factors along the timeline. It shows how conditions, decisions, and reactions together produce a course of events. | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 45–90 min | 2-6 h | 30–60 min per interview |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 3-10 | 3-10 | 1 participant per interview |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Event Timeline, Causal Factor Chart, Cause List, Corrective Actions | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | CausalityIncidentRoot causeTimeline | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery |