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 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
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
Purposedifferent
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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h1-2 Tage20-45 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
2-8Based on research questionBased on research question1-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesFindability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAContent groups, Label set, IA hypothesesArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
Information architectureNavigationFindability
Information architectureNavigationStructure
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods