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 of an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
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.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.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.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
1-2 Tage1-3 h15-45 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question2-81-31-8
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesADR File, Decision Log, RationaleArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
Information architectureNavigationFindability
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods