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 Problem Interview
Product Discovery
Problem Interview
Paper illustration for Fake Door Test
Product Discovery
Fake Door Test
Paper illustration of MVP Test Matrix with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
MVP Test Matrix
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 the picture of the problem still needs to become solid, it asks about real situations and consequences. It separates genuine suffering from mere interest in a solution.When demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small.When several minimal variants compete to answer the same question, it makes comparing and choosing between them cleaner. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Test Matrix and a Test Plan.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage30-60 min je Interview1-5 Tage45-75 min
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question5-12 InterviewsNutzertraffic2-8
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Findability Metrics, Path Analysis, Revised IAProblem Evidence, Risk Notes, Customer SegmentsClick Data, Interest Signal, Learning DecisionTest Matrix, Test Plan
Tagsno overlap
Information architectureNavigationFindability
DiscoveryInterviewsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery
ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryOptions
Add more methods