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 showing three sorted card stacks and an open question about a possible group.
UX Research
Card Sorting
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration of an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Paper illustration of a branching category tree with a highlighted search path and possible dead ends.
UX Research
Tree Testing
Purposedifferent
When content only makes sense internally and users can't find the structure again, card sorting exposes their mental order. Terms, groups, and naming are then aligned with the target group's expectations.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.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 a navigation exists but search paths still fail, tree testing checks findability without visual distraction. The method shows whether labels, levels, and paths really lead to the intended destination.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
20-45 min1-3 h1-3 h1-2 Tage
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question1-82-8Based on research question
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Content groups, Label set, IA hypothesesArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesFindability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IA
Tagsno overlap
Information architectureNavigationStructure
SensemakingDecisionRationale
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
Information architectureNavigationFindability
Add more methods