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 of a branching category tree with a highlighted search path and possible dead ends.
UX Research
Tree Testing
Paper illustration for PDCA Cycle.
Operations
PDCA Cycle
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
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 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.For an improvement that still has to prove itself in everyday work, the method runs it through small learning loops. It connects planning, checking, and standardization into a repeatable learning mode.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
LowMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
20-45 min1-2 Tage1 h bis mehrere Wochen1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
Based on research questionBased on research question1-81-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Content groups, Label set, IA hypothesesFindability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAPDCA Log, Experiment Plan, Learning Outcome, Standard ChangeExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summary
Tagsno overlap
Information architectureNavigationStructure
Information architectureNavigationFindability
Continuous improvementLeanExperiments
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
Add more methods