methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of a calm four-quadrant Assumption Map with hypothesis cards and emphasis on important assumptions with little evidence.
Product Discovery
Assumption Mapping
Paper illustration of a participant using a prototype while an observer takes notes beside a highlighted usability issue.
UX Research
Usability Testing
Paper illustration for Smoke Test.
Product Discovery
Smoke Test
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Purposedifferent
When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first.When a product is built but people get stuck on tasks, usability testing shows the friction at concrete points. Observed use instead of self-report makes visible where orientation, understanding, or interaction breaks down.When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
45-60 min1-2 h je Session1-5 Tage1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
2-8Based on research questionNutzertraffic1-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk rankingUsability Issues, Severity List, RecommendationsInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning NoteExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summary
Tags1 shared
AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation
ValidationUXPrototype
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
Add more methods