Reference table
CIT vs other interview methods
A comparison of five research interview methods by focus, typical sample size and the output each produces. Use it to decide when the critical incident technique fits better than Jobs to Be Done, usability testing, NPS follow-up or think aloud. The sample sizes are the typical ranges given in Koji's guide to the critical incident technique.
Where this appears
What's in this reference table
| Method | Focus | Sample size | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical incident technique | Specific incidents | 10 to 20 | Incident categories |
| Jobs to Be Done | Motivations and context | 10 to 30 | Job statements |
| Usability testing | Task performance | 5 to 8 | Usability issues |
| NPS follow-up | Overall sentiment | 100s | Themes |
| Think aloud | Real-time cognition | 5 to 8 | UI friction points |
Use this image
Free to use in your docs, decks and posts under CC BY 4.0, as long as you credit Koji with a link to this page. To embed it, paste this into your page:
html
<a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/critical-incident-technique-vs-other-interview-methods"><img src="https://www.koji.so/visuals/critical-incident-technique-vs-other-interview-methods/critical-incident-technique-vs-other-interview-methods.png" alt="Table comparing critical incident technique, Jobs to Be Done, usability testing, NPS follow-up and think aloud by focus, sample size and output." width="1200" height="645" /></a>
<p>Source: <a href="https://www.koji.so/visuals/critical-incident-technique-vs-other-interview-methods">CIT vs other interview methods</a>, Koji</p>
