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 two user profile cards with a goal, behavior evidence, and an open research question.
UX Research
Personas
Anonymous individual judgments pass through feedback loops to form a distribution.
Decision Making
Delphi Method
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration for Smoke Test.
Product Discovery
Smoke Test
Purposedifferent
When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions.When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together.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.When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighHighLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Tage1-4 Wochen1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
Internes Team6-30 Experten1-6Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario NotesExpert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption NotesExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note
Tagsno overlap
ResearchCustomerSynthesis
ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
Add more methods