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 a branching category tree with a highlighted search path and possible dead ends.
UX Research
Tree Testing
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Purposedifferent
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 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.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage1-3 h1-4 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question1-83-82-8
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tagsno overlap
Information architectureNavigationFindability
SensemakingDecisionRationale
RiskDecisionSensemaking
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods