View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Usability Testing |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h je Session | 1-3 h | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional |
Participantsdifferent | Based on research question | 1-8 | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Usability Issues, Severity List, Recommendations | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions |
Tagsno overlap | ValidationUXPrototype | SensemakingDecisionRationale | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
