View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
Selected:Card SortingRisk StormingARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
| Criterion |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Architecture Risk Storming |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Architecture LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. | LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 60-90 min | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additional |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 4-12 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Lean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checks |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationStructure | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean |