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 |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Decision Making Argument 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. | When an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | 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 per interview | 30-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 2-8 | 2-8 | 1-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | SensemakingDecisionRationale |