简体中文
EnglishWhat Research Methods Does UX Metrics Support?
Updated
UX Metrics supports card sorts, tree tests, surveys, usability tests, prototypes, and interviews — all inside a single workflow, and all runnable with your own participants. That combination is the main reason to consider it: if you need to test information architecture and then follow up with a survey or a prototype task without moving your participants to a different tool, this platform is built for that. It is free for up to 3 participants per study, so you can validate the workflow before committing.
Methods by research goal
The platform groups its methods around what you are trying to learn, not around a fixed menu order. The table below maps each method to the question it answers.
| Method | What it answers | Typical use |
|---|---|---|
| Card sort | How do people group and label your content? | Building or fixing categories and navigation labels |
| Tree test | Can people find things in your existing structure? | Validating an IA before or after a redesign |
| Survey | What do people say about their needs and preferences? | Scaling a question beyond a handful of sessions |
| Usability test | Can people complete a task, and where do they struggle? | Testing flows, labels, and interactions |
| Prototype test | Does a design work before it is built? | Early concept and iteration checks |
| Interview | Why do people behave the way they do? | Adding context and motivation to quantitative findings |
Card sorts and tree tests for information architecture
These two are the IA-specific pair, and they answer different questions. A card sort is generative: you give participants a set of items and they group and name them, which tells you how users mentally organize your content. A tree test is evaluative: you give participants your existing hierarchy and a task, and you see whether they can find the right destination.
The practical sequence is card sort first to propose a structure, tree test second to check that the structure works. Running both in one platform matters because the labels and categories from the card sort feed directly into the tree you test.
Surveys and usability tests
Surveys let you collect structured responses at a scale a single moderated session cannot reach. Usability tests give you task-level evidence: whether someone completes a task, how long it takes, and where they get stuck.
Use a survey when you need breadth on attitudes or preferences, and a usability test when you need to watch behavior on a specific flow. If you already have a usability finding, a short survey can tell you how widespread the problem is.
Prototypes and interviews
Prototype testing lets you put a design in front of people before development, so you catch structural problems while changes are still cheap. Interviews add the "why" — the reasoning behind a choice that a task completion metric will not explain.
A common pattern: run a prototype test to find where people fail, then interview a few of those participants to understand what they expected instead.
Why "one workflow" is the actual feature
The methods are individually common. What the platform emphasizes is that they share one workflow, one participant pool, and one place for analysis — the site describes links, embeds, live URLs, and shareable analysis as part of the setup. In practice this means:
- Recruit once, reuse participants. You can run a card sort, then invite the same people into a tree test or survey without rebuilding a panel.
- Keep context together. Findings from a tree test sit next to the survey that followed it, which makes the "what happened and why" story easier to assemble.
- Share results as links or embeds. Stakeholders can view analysis without a walkthrough from you.
The site also states that AI features are powered by your full research context, which is only meaningful if your methods actually live in one place — another argument for consolidating rather than stitching tools together.
Choosing between methods
If you are unsure where to start, work backward from the decision you need to make:
- Restructuring navigation or categories → card sort, then tree test.
- Checking whether a specific task is completable → usability test.
- Measuring how common an attitude or preference is → survey.
- Validating a design before build → prototype test.
- Understanding motivation behind observed behavior → interview.
You do not need every method. Pick the one that matches your decision, and add a second only when the first leaves a question it cannot answer.
Getting started and what to check
The platform is free for up to 3 participants per study, which is enough to run a pilot of any method above and confirm the setup works for your team. Before committing to a paid tier, check the pricing page for participant limits and feature differences, since the free allowance is per study rather than unlimited.
Two practical checks worth doing during a pilot:
- Run one card sort and one tree test on the same content. If the labels transfer cleanly between them, the single-workflow claim holds for your use case.
- Test the sharing path. Send a shareable analysis link to a colleague and confirm they can read it without your account.
If both pass, the platform fits teams that want IA testing and broader UX research in one place. If you only ever run one method, a single-purpose tool may be simpler — the value here comes from combining methods.