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 |  Systems Thinking Current Reality Tree |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 2-6 h | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-8 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
