View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Discovery Smoke Test |  UX Research Card Sorting |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Growth A/B Testing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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 | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 20-45 min | 45-90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | Nutzertraffic | Based on research question | 2-8 | 1-6 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note | Content groups, Label set, IA hypotheses | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Experiment results, Decision log, Learning summary |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth | Information architectureNavigationStructure | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation |