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 participant using a prototype while an observer takes notes beside a highlighted usability issue.
UX Research
Usability Testing
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 RAPID
Decision Making
RAPID
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Purposedifferent
When a product is built but people get stuck on tasks, usability testing shows the friction at concrete points. Observed use instead of self-report makes visible where orientation, understanding, or interaction breaks down.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.In complex management decisions, clarity is often missing about who recommends, who agrees, and who makes the decision. RAPID creates this assignment and stabilizes decisions across several levels.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h je Session15-45 min45-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question1-33-121-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Usability Issues, Severity List, RecommendationsADR File, Decision Log, RationaleRAPID Role Map, Recommendation, Decision LogArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
ValidationUXPrototype
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
DecisionRolesGovernance
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods