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 User Interviews |  Knowledge Modeling Concept Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Knowledge Modeling Knowledge Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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 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. | Knowledge Mapping makes knowledge, gaps, and transfer paths visible across a field. It fits when expertise should not just exist but also be findable and transferable. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-2 h | 45–90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 1-8 | 3-10 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Concept Map, Relationship Labels, Knowledge Gaps | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Knowledge Map, Critical Knowledge Areas, Transfer Plan |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | KnowledgeConceptsMappingSensemaking | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | KnowledgeMappingRisk |