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 a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
A/B Testing workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Growth
A/B Testing
Paper illustration for Smoke Test.
Product Discovery
Smoke Test
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 a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.When two variants compete, discussions quickly decide by taste rather than effect. A/B Testing checks behavior under controlled conditions and separates real improvement from chance or expectation effects.When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h je Session30-60 min1-4 Wochen1-5 Tage
Participantsdifferent
Based on research question3-101-6Nutzertraffic
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Usability Issues, Severity List, RecommendationsRisk Matrix, Top Risk ListExperiment results, Decision log, Learning summaryInterest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note
Tagsno overlap
ValidationUXPrototype
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
ExperimentsGrowthAnalyticsValidation
ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth
Add more methods