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 Card Sorting |  Product Discovery Solution Interview |  Product Discovery Assumption Mapping |  Growth A/B 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 a solution idea is already on the table, it checks how it is understood and evaluated. It looks for resonance, objections, and missing fit early in the conversation. | When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first. | 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 | Low | Medium | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 20-45 min | 30-60 min je Interview | 45-60 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 5-10 Interviews | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Solution Feedback, Objection List, Validation Notes | Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | Information architectureNavigationStructure | ValidationInterviewsPrototype | AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |