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 User Interviews |  Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs) |  Product Discovery Experiment Canvas |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | 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. | When experiments become unreadable after the fact, it arranges hypothesis, signal, and learning goal on a single canvas. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a Completed Experiment Canvas and a Success Metric. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | Designers, developers as users, and facilitation | 1-5 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions | Completed Experiment Canvas, Success Metric |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryHypothesis |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
