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 Pretotyping with its method-specific working model.
Product Discovery
Pretotyping
Paper illustration of a branching category tree with a highlighted search path and possible dead ends.
UX Research
Tree Testing
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
Pretotyping clarifies whether a customer problem and solution idea create enough real demand. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence, and captures the result as a pretotyping sketch, test setup, and conversion data.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 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
LowMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
Stunden bis wenige Tage1-2 Tage1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
1-4Based on research question1-6Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Pretotyping sketch, Test setup, Conversion data, Go or no-go decisionFindability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note
Tagsno overlap
ValidationDemandMVP
Information architectureNavigationFindability
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
Add more methods