ISTQB ISTQB-CTFL ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL v4.0) Exam Practice Test

A project risk relates to potential issues that could affect the overall success of the project. Among the options provided, the risk that "Team members' skills may not be sufficient for the assigned work" is clearly a project risk because it pertains to the potential failure of the project due to inadequate skillsets among the team. This risk affects the entire project's ability to meet its objectives.

Risk management is a process that identifies, analyzes, evaluates and mitigates risks in a software project. Risks are factors that may negatively affect the quality, schedule, budget or scope of a software project. The main goals of risk management in a software project are to reduce the probability of undesired situations and to reduce the effect of potential impact. This can be achieved by applying various strategies, such as avoidance, transfer, reduction or acceptance. Risk management does not aim to increase the success probability for the project regardless of costs, as this may not be feasible or realistic. Risk management does not aim to increase focus on preventative processes and to increase satisfaction for the testers, as these are secondary or indirect outcomes. Risk management does not aim to control contractual problems and minimize the impacts of company policies, as these are specific types of risks that may not apply to all projects. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 2, page 14-15.

Configuration management in the context of testing involves the systematic control of changes to the configuration items, including testware such as test scripts, test data, and test environments. It ensures that all changes are tracked and recorded, enabling the version control and management of testware​​ .

Option A is related to test execution rather than configuration management. Option C describes quality management in a broader sense, not specifically configuration management. Option D is specific to the configuration of tools, not the overall management of testware versions.

This answer is correct because the test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are not a typical content of a test completion report for a test project. A test completion report is a document that summarizes the test activities and results at the end of a test project. It usually includes information such as the test objectives, scope, approach, resources, schedule, results, deviations, issues, risks, lessons learned, and recommendations for improvement. The test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are part of the test documentation, but they are not relevant for the test completion report, as they do not provide a high-level overview of the test project outcomes and performance. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.5.3.2

The whole team approach, often advocated in Agile methodologies, emphasizes collaboration and collective responsibility among all team members. This approach enhances the relationships within the team and improves overall collaboration, which in turn benefits the project's success. According to the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, the whole team approach fosters better communication and cooperation, leading to more effective problem-solving and higher-quality outcomes​​.

The whole team approach involves collaboration among all team members, including testers, developers, and business representatives, to achieve quality goals. However, this approach may not be suitable in situations where a high level of test independence is required. Test independence is essential in cases where unbiased testing is critical, such as in regulated environments or where high-risk systems are involved. This is because team members might unintentionally influence each other's work, leading to potential bias in testing outcomes​​.

The Testing Quadrants model helps Agile teams by categorizing different types of tests and their purposes. This differentiation helps test managers explain the testing strategy to all stakeholders, ensuring everyone understands the scope and objectives of each test type. This model aids in planning, executing, and tracking testing activities across different quadrants, making it easier to align with stakeholders' expectations and project goals. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.1.7

Decision table testing is used to analyze combinations of inputs to determine the appropriate outputs, often based on specific rules or conditions.

For the problem statement:

Rule 1: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = True)

Outcome: Transaction = Approved

Rule 4: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = False)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

The additional test cases are:

DT1: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Insufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = True)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

DT2: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = False, Correct PIN = True)

Outcome: Transaction = Approved

DT3: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Insufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = False)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

DT4: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = False, Correct PIN = False)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

From the given test cases, DT2 covers the scenario where Fast Cash is False, which is not covered in the initial cases. DT3 covers the case where Balance is Insufficient and PIN is incorrect.

Combining Rules 1 and 4 with DT2 and DT3 covers all the scenarios.

Experience-based test techniques are test design techniques that rely on the experience, knowledge, intuition, and creativity of the testers to identify and execute test cases that are likely to find defects in the software system. Experience-based test techniques are often useful to detect hidden defects that have not been targeted by black-box test techniques, which are test design techniques that use the external behavior and specifications of the software system as the test basis, without considering its internal structure or implementation. Experience-based test techniques can complement black-box test techniques by covering aspects that are not explicitly specified, such as usability, security, reliability, performance, etc. The other statements are false, because:

Experience-based test techniques do not rely on the experience of testers to identify the root causes of defects found by black-box test techniques, but rather to identify the potential sources of defects based on their own insights, heuristics, or exploratory testing. The root causes of defects are usually identified by debugging or root cause analysis, which are activities that involve examining the code or the development process to find and fix the errors that led to the defects.

Some of the most common test basis used by white-box test techniques include the source code, the design documents, the architecture diagrams, and the control flow graphs of the software system. White-box test techniques are test design techniques that use the internal structure and implementation of the software system as the test basis, and aim to achieve a certain level of test coverage based on the code elements, such as statements, branches, paths, etc. User stories, use cases, and business processes are examples of test basis used by black-box test techniques, as they describe the functional and non-functional requirements of the software system from the perspective of the users or the stakeholders.

The primary goal of experience-based test techniques is not to design test cases that can be easily automated using a GUI-based test automation tool, but rather to design test cases that can reveal defects that are not easily detected by other test techniques, such as boundary value analysis, equivalence partitioning, state transition testing, etc. Test automation is the use of software tools to execute test cases and compare actual results with expected results, without human intervention. Test automation can be applied to different types of test techniques, depending on the test objectives, the test levels, the test tools, and the test resources. However, test automation is not always feasible or beneficial, especially for test cases that require human judgment, creativity, or exploration, such as those designed by experience-based test techniques. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.1, Black-box Test Design Techniques

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.2, White-box Test Design Techniques

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Experience-based Test Technique, Black-box Test Technique, White-box Test Technique, Test Basis, Test Coverage, Test Automation

A static analysis tool is best suited for determining source code compliance with coding standards. These tools analyze the code without executing it and can check for adherence to coding standards, syntax errors, and other static properties of the code. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus emphasizes the role of static analysis tools in verifying that code meets predefined standards and guidelines.

Traceability primarily refers to the ability to link test cases back to their sources in the test basis, such as requirements or design documents. This linkage allows for the determination of coverage, impact analysis, and maintaining consistency across test documentation. However, traceability does not directly enable the application of experience-based test techniques, which are more about using the tester's intuition and experience. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 does not state that traceability enables experience-based techniques, making option B the false statement​​.

A correct list of boundary values for the P input should include the minimum and maximum values of the valid range (15 and 350), as well as the values just below and above the boundaries (14 and 351). Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an input domain or output range, as these values are more likely to cause errors than values in the middle. Option B satisfies this condition, as it has all four boundary values (14, 15, 350, 351). Option A has two values from the same equivalence class (1000 and 99999), option C has two values outside the range (999 and 100000), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

Statement B contradicts the general principles of testing, because running the same test set more often will not increase the chances of finding new defects, unless there are some changes in the system or environment that affect the test results. Running different test sets with different inputs, outputs or conditions would be more effective in finding new defects. Statements A, C and D are consistent with the general principles of testing. Statement A states that most defects are found in a small subset of a system’s modules, which is true according to the defect clustering principle. Statement C states that testing is better if it starts at the beginning of a project, which is true according to the early testing principle. Statement D states that how testing is done, is based on the situation in a particular project, which is true according to the context-dependent testing principle. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, pages 4-6.

Statement D is correct. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, both black-box test techniques (which focus on testing without internal knowledge of the application) and experience-based test techniques (which rely on testers' experience and intuition) can be applied to both functional and non-functional testing. Functional testing is concerned with what the system does, whereas non-functional testing looks at how the system performs under certain conditions. These techniques are versatile and can be employed to address both these aspects​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Product risks are risks that impact the quality or functionality of the software, whereas project risks affect the process, resources, or timeline.

(A) is correct because incorrect calculations impact software correctness.

(B), (C), and (D) are project risks as they relate to team coordination, staffing, and scheduling rather than software defects.

Identifying product risks early improves defect detection and ensures better coverage for high-risk areas.

Test-driven development is not an example of a typical generic skill required for testing, but rather an example of a specific technical skill or a development practice that may or may not be relevant for testing, depending on the context and the objectives of the testing activities. Test-driven development is an approach to software development and testing, in which the developers write automated unit tests before writing the source code, and then refactor the code until the tests pass. Test-driven development can help to improve the quality, the design, and the maintainability of the code, as well as to provide fast feedback and guidance for the developers. However, test-driven development is not a skill that is generally expected or needed for testers, especially for testers who are not involved in unit testing or who do not have access to the source code. The other options are examples of typical generic skills required for testing, which are skills that are applicable and beneficial for testing in any context or situation, regardless of the specific testing techniques, tools, or methods used. The typical generic skills required for testing include:

Be able to use test management tools and defect tracking tools: These are tools that help testers to plan, organize, monitor, and control the testing activities and resources, as well as to record, track, analyze, and resolve the defects detected during testing. These tools can improve the efficiency, the effectiveness, and the communication of the testing process, as well as to provide traceability, metrics, and reports for the testing outcomes.

Be able to communicate defects and failures to developers as objectively as possible: This is a skill that involves the ability to report and describe the defects and failures found during testing in a clear, concise, accurate, and unbiased manner, using relevant information, evidence, and terminology, without making assumptions, judgments, or accusations. This skill can facilitate the collaboration, the understanding, and the resolution of the defects and failures between the testers and the developers, as well as to prevent conflicts, misunderstandings, or blame games.

Possess the necessary social skills that support effective teamwork: These are skills that involve the ability to interact, cooperate, and coordinate with other people involved in or affected by the testing activities, such as the test manager, the test team, the project manager, the developers, the customers, the users, etc. These skills can include communication, negotiation, leadership, motivation, feedback, conflict resolution, etc. These skills can enhance the quality, the productivity, and the satisfaction of the testing process, as well as to foster a positive and constructive testing culture. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.1, Testing and the Software Development Lifecycle

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.2, Testing and Quality

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.1, Testing Principles

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Test-driven Development, Test Management Tool, Defect Tracking Tool, Defect Report, Failure, Social Skill2

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The planning phase of the review process (C) includes defining the review’s purpose, scope, and exit criteria to ensure alignment. Option A is part of the defect management phase, B happens during individual preparation, and D takes place in the review meeting.

Product risk involves the potential issues that can affect the quality and functionality of the software product, such as defects, performance problems, and usability issues. Project risk, on the other hand, relates to the risks that can impact the project's schedule, budget, and resources, such as delays, cost overruns, and resource constraints. Understanding both types of risks is crucial for managing and mitigating potential problems in software projects.

Using equivalence partitioning, the investment ranges are divided into four partitions:

R500 to R10,000 (10%)

R10,001 to R50,000 (11%)

R50,001 to R100,000 (12%)

R100,001 to R500,000 (13%)

Thus, the minimum number of test cases required to cover all valid equivalence partitions for calculating the interest is 4​​.

Exercising at least one of the decision outcomes for all decisions within the code, ensures achieving full branch coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all branches in the control flow of the code are executed at least once by the test cases. A branch is a basic block of code that has a single entry point and a single exit point, and a decision is a point in the code where the control flow can take more than one direction, such as an if-then-else statement, a switch-case statement, a loop statement, etc. The decision outcomes are the possible paths that can be taken from a decision, such as the then branch or the else branch, the case branch or the default branch, the loop body or the loop exit, etc. The other statements are false, because:

The minimum number of test cases needed to achieve full branch coverage, is usually higher than that needed to achieve full statement coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all executable statements in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. This is because branch coverage is a stronger criterion than statement coverage, as it implies statement coverage, but not vice versa. For example, a single test case can achieve full statement coverage for an if-then-else statement, but two test cases are needed to achieve full branch coverage, as both the then branch and the else branch need to be exercised.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all unconditional branches within the code have not necessarily been exercised, as unconditional branches are branches that do not depend on any decision, and are always executed, such as a goto statement, a break statement, a return statement, etc. Unconditional branches are not part of the branch coverage criterion, as they do not represent different paths in the control flow of the code. However, they are part of the statement coverage criterion, as they are executable statements in the code.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all combinations of conditions in a decision table have not necessarily been exercised, as a decision table is a test design technique that represents the logical relationships between multiple conditions and their corresponding actions, in a tabular format. A decision table can have more combinations of conditions than the number of decision outcomes in the code, as each condition can have two or more possible values, such as true or false, yes or no, etc. For example, a decision table with four conditions can have 16 combinations of conditions, but the corresponding code may have only two decision outcomes, such as pass or fail. To exercise all combinations of conditions in a decision table, a stronger test coverage criterion is needed, such as condition combination coverage, which requires that all possible combinations of condition outcomes in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.3.1, Test Coverage Criteria Based on the Structure of the Software

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Branch Coverage, Statement Coverage, Branch, Decision, Decision Outcome, Unconditional Branch, Decision Table, Condition Combination Coverage

A new navigation system compared with a previous system is the most suitable application for testing by use cases, because it involves a high level of interaction between the user and the system, and the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are based on the user’s needs and goals. Use cases can help to specify the functional requirements of the new navigation system, such as the ability to enter a destination, select a route, follow the directions, receive alerts, etc. Use cases can also help to compare the accuracy and usability of the new system with the previous system, by defining the success and failure scenarios, the preconditions and postconditions, and the alternative flows of each use case. Use cases can also help to design and execute test cases that cover the main and exceptional paths of each use case, and to verify the satisfaction of the user’s expectations.

The other options are not the most suitable applications for testing by use cases, because they do not involve a high level of interaction between the user and the system, or the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are not based on the user’s needs and goals. A billing system used to calculate monthly charge based on a large number of subscriber parameters is more suitable for testing by data-driven testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using a large set of input and output data. The ability of an antivirus package to detect and quarantine a new threat is more suitable for testing by exploratory testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and security of a system or component by using an informal and flexible approach, based on the tester’s experience and intuition. The suitability and performance of a multimedia (audio video based) system to a new operating system is more suitable for testing by compatibility testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using different hardware, software, or network environments. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 3.1.1, page 28-29; Section 4.1.1, page 44-45; Section 4.2.1, page 47-48.

To apply one-dimensional equivalence partitioning to the ID requirement, we need to consider each condition individually:

Length of the ID: Valid partitions (5-10 characters), Invalid partitions (less than 5, more than 10) = 3 partitions.

Type of characters: Valid partitions (alphanumeric), Invalid partitions (non-alphanumeric) = 2 partitions.

First character: Valid partitions (letter), Invalid partitions (non-letter) = 2 partitions. Adding these partitions, we get a total of 3 (length) + 2 (character type) + 2 (first character) = 7 partitions. Thus, the correct answer is A​​.

An oracle is a mechanism or source that can provide the expected result for a given test input or situation. Sometimes old version of a product can be used as an oracle, if it is assumed that the old version behaves correctly for the test cases that are executed on the new version. This is also known as back-to-back testing. Oracles do not help in reproducing the irreproducible bugs, as they only provide the expected results, not the actual results. Oracles are not derived from the design, but from the requirements or specifications. Oracles cannot be generated automatically using data generators, as data generators only provide test inputs, not test outputs. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 9.

The correct test execution sequence should consider both the dependencies between the requirements and their priorities. According to the diagram, the sequence begins with R2 (P1) as it is a prerequisite for R3 (P4). Then R1 (P3) can be tested. R3 follows as it depends on R2. Next, R7 (P4) should be tested before R6 (P3) and R5 (P2), as indicated by their dependencies. Finally, R4 (P1) and R8 (P1) can be tested. Therefore, the best sequence is R2, R1, R3, R7, R6, R5, R4, R8. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.1.5

In a formal review process, the recorder's role is typically responsible for documenting the findings of the review team, including action items, decisions, and recommendations. This ensures that there is an accurate record of what was discussed and agreed upon, facilitating follow-up and continuous improvement. Therefore, statement C is correct as per the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

For boundary value analysis, the test cases should include the boundary values just inside and just outside the equivalence partition for the 13% interest rate range:

R100,000 (just inside the previous range)

R100,001 (start of the 13% range)

R500,000 (end of the 13% range)

R500,001 (just outside the range)

These values ensure that both the edges of the partition are tested​​.

The ISTQB fundamental test process consists of five main phases, as described in the ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.2, page 15:

Test planning and control: This phase involves defining the test objectives, scope, strategy, resources, schedule, risks, and metrics, as well as monitoring and controlling the test activities and results throughout the test process.

Test analysis and design: This phase involves analyzing the test basis (such as requirements, specifications, or user stories) to identify test conditions (such as features, functions, or scenarios) that need to be tested, and designing test cases and test procedures (such as inputs, expected outcomes, and execution steps) to cover the test conditions. This phase also involves evaluating the testability of the test basis and the test items (such as software or system components), and selecting and implementing test techniques (such as equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, or state transition testing) to achieve the test objectives and optimize the test coverage and efficiency.

Test implementation and execution: This phase involves preparing the test environment (such as hardware, software, data, or tools) and testware (such as test cases, test procedures, test data, or test scripts) for test execution, and executing the test procedures or scripts according to the test plan and schedule. This phase also involves logging the outcome of test execution, comparing the actual results with the expected results, and reporting any discrepancies as incidents (such as defects, errors, or failures).

Evaluating exit criteria and reporting: This phase involves checking if the planned test activities have been completed and the exit criteria (such as quality, coverage, or risk levels) have been met, and reporting the test results and outcomes to the stakeholders. This phase also involves making recommendations for the release or acceptance decision based on the test results and outcomes, and identifying any residual risks (such as known defects or untested areas) that need to be addressed or mitigated.

Test closure activities: This phase involves finalizing and archiving the testware and test environment for future reuse, and evaluating the test process and the test project against the test objectives and the test plan. This phase also involves identifying any lessons learned and best practices, and communicating the findings and suggestions for improvement to the relevant parties.

References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.2, page 15; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 37-38; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 - Sample Exam - Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 88, page 32.

This answer is correct because it follows the logical dependencies and allows executing the test cases in priority order. TC4, TC3, and TC2 are executed first because they have the highest priority. TC6 is executed next because it has a logical dependency on TC2. TC1 is executed next because it has a logical dependency on TC5. Finally, TC5 is executed last because it has the lowest priority. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 documents

The correct outcome of a two-value boundary value analysis applied to the password length is the set of test cases represented by option D. Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that focuses on the values at the boundaries of an equivalence partition, such as the minimum and maximum values, or the values just above and below the boundaries. A two-value boundary value analysis uses two values for each boundary, one representing the valid value and one representing the invalid value. For example, if the valid range of values is from 4 to 7, then the two values for the lower boundary are 3 and 4, and the two values for the upper boundary are 7 and 8. The test cases in option D use these values for the password length, while also satisfying the other requirements of the password, such as containing at least one numeric character, one capital letter, and one lowercase letter. The test cases in option D are:

1RhT: a 4-character password that is valid

rSp53: a 5-character password that is valid

3N3e10: a 6-character password that is valid

8sBdby: an 8-character password that is invalid The test cases in the other options are incorrect, because they either use values that are not at the boundaries of the password length, or they do not meet the other requirements of the password. For example, the test cases in option A are:

1xA: a 3-character password that is invalid, but it does not contain a capital letter

aB11: a 4-character password that is valid

Pq1ZZab: a 7-character password that is valid

7iDD0a1x: an 8-character password that is invalid References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.1, Black-box Test Design Techniques1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Boundary Value Analysis, Equivalence Partition2

The correct set of data for valid equivalence class partitions should include one value from each equivalence class, and no value from outside the range. Option C satisfies this condition, as it has one value from each of the four equivalence classes (50, 100, 250, 500). Option A has two values from the same equivalence class (100 and 200), option B has values outside the range (0 and 0.99), and option D has two values from the same equivalence class (1000 and 500). Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 35.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

BDD emphasizes collaboration between developers, testers, and business stakeholders to define system behavior in a readable format (A). It typically uses the Given-When-Then syntax. Unlike unit testing (B), BDD is at a higher level of abstraction. It does not focus solely on non-functional testing (C) and encourages early testing rather than post-development validation (D).

Confirmation testing is performed after a defect is fixed, and if such testing is successful then the regression tests that are relevant for such fix can be executed. Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is the process of verifying that a defect has been resolved by running the test case that originally detected the defect. Confirmation testing is usually done before regression testing, which is the process of verifying that no new defects have been introduced in the software as a result of changes or fixes. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.

Static analysis is a technique that analyzes the source code or other software artifacts without executing them. Static analysis can detect defects such as syntax errors, coding standards violations, potential security vulnerabilities, or logical flaws. Static analysis can catch the bug in the first implementation, as it contains two syntax errors: the variable y is declared twice, and the assignment statement X = y=z is invalid. Static analysis cannot catch the bugs in the other three implementations, as they are logical errors that do not violate any syntax rules, but produce incorrect results. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 25-26.

The absence-of-errors fallacy is the mistaken belief that just because a software system is free of defects, it will meet the user's needs and expectations. Involving users early through practices like prototyping helps ensure that the development team is building the right system that meets user expectations, not just a system that is defect-free. This approach aligns with the testing principle that emphasizes understanding the users' needs and ensuring the system fulfills them. This principle is explained in the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0​​.

Good testing practice dictates that each test level (e.g., unit testing, integration testing, system testing) should have distinct test objectives aligned with the phase of the software development lifecycle it addresses. This ensures that testing is effective and relevant at each stage. According to the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, establishing clear test objectives that are consistent with the development phase helps in achieving specific goals and improving the overall quality of the software product​​.

The support offered by a performance testing tool is often leveraged by testers to run load tests, which are tests that simulate a large number of concurrent users or transactions on the system under test, in order to measure its performance, reliability, and scalability. Performance testing tools can help testers to generate realistic workloads, monitor system behavior, collect and analyze performance metrics, and identify performance bottlenecks. The other statements are false, because:

A test data preparation tool is a tool that helps testers to create, manage, and manipulate test data, which are the inputs and outputs of test cases. Test data preparation tools are not directly related to running automated regression test suites, which are test suites that verify that the system still works as expected after changes or modifications. Regression test suites are usually executed by test execution tools, which are tools that can automatically run test cases and compare actual results with expected results.

A bug prediction tool is a tool that uses machine learning or statistical techniques to predict the likelihood of defects in a software system, based on various factors such as code complexity, code churn, code coverage, code smells, etc. Bug prediction tools are not used by testers to track the bugs they found, which are the actual defects that have been detected and reported during testing. Bugs are usually tracked by defect management tools, which are tools that help testers to record, monitor, analyze, and resolve defects.

A continuous integration tool is a tool that enables the integration of code changes from multiple developers into a shared repository, and the execution of automated builds and tests, in order to ensure the quality and consistency of the software system. Continuous integration tools are not used by testers to automatically generate test cases from a model, which are test cases that are derived from a representation of the system under test, such as a state diagram, a decision table, a use case, etc. Test cases can be automatically generated by test design tools, which are tools that support the implementation and maintenance of test cases, based on test design specifications or test models. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.4.1, Types of Test Tools

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Performance Testing Tool, Test Data Preparation Tool, Bug Prediction Tool, Continuous Integration Tool, Test Execution Tool, Defect Management Tool, Test Design Tool

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Statement testing aims to execute every executable statement in the source code at least once.

(D) is correct as statement testing ensures maximum statement execution.

(A) describes branch testing, which focuses on flow transfers.

(B) and (C) incorrectly mix decision testing and branch testing concepts.

This answer is correct because a walkthrough is a type of review where the author of the work product leads the review process and explains the work product to the reviewers. The reviewers are not required to prepare for the review in advance, and the main objective of the walkthrough is to establish a common understanding of the work product and to identify any major defects or issues. A walkthrough is usually informal and does not follow a defined process or roles. In this case, the review for a high-level architectural document written by a software architect matches the characteristics of a walkthrough. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.4.2.2

Debugging is the process of finding, analyzing and removing the causes of failures in software. Debugging is not considered part of testing, but rather a development activity that can involve testing. Debugging is not intended to find as many defects as possible, but rather to fix the specific failure that was observed. Debugging is usually performed by developers, not by test engineers. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 1, page 6.

The fundamental testing process includes activities that are directly related to the planning, preparation, execution, and evaluation of tests, as well as the closure activities of the testing phase. Option D, "Build release and maintenance," falls outside the scope of the fundamental testing process as it relates more to software development and operations rather than specific testing activities. Options A, "Archiving automation code," B, "Test status reporting," and C, "Test process improvement," are all activities that can be part of or associated with the fundamental testing process. Archiving automation code is part of test closure, test status reporting is part of test monitoring and control, and test process improvement can be an outcome of test closure activities.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The Moderator (D) plays a key role in formal reviews by facilitating discussions, ensuring that reviews stay on track, and creating an open environment for feedback. The Manager (A) is responsible for overseeing the testing process but does not directly facilitate reviews. The Reviewer (B) is responsible for examining the work product, while the Review Leader (C) organizes reviews but does not necessarily mediate them.

When writing a defect report, the tester can specify the expected result and the actual result based on the observation. The expected result is what the requirements specify, and the actual result is what was observed during testing. These elements are crucial for clearly communicating the nature of the defect to developers and other stakeholders. The other items such as test environment, test level, and root cause may not be clear or necessary at this stage of defect reporting.

A decision table is a technique that should be used to cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an Automated Teller Machine (ATM). A decision table shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). A decision table consists of four quadrants: conditions (inputs), actions (outputs), condition entries (values) and action entries (results). A decision table can be used to test components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify three input conditions: the bank card is valid, the PIN code is correct, and money is available in the user’s account. We can also identify four output actions: the card is rejected, the ATM asks for another PIN code, the ATM asks for another amount, and the ATM dispenses the money. A decision table can show all possible combinations of these conditions and actions in a systematic way.

Use case based testing is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Use case based testing is a technique that verifies that a software product or system meets its specified requirements or user stories by executing realistic scenarios or workflows. Use case based testing can be used to test components that have complex or dynamic interactions with users or other systems. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify several use cases, such as withdraw money, check balance, transfer money, etc. Each use case can have one or more scenarios that describe the steps and outcomes of the interaction. However, use case based testing may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some scenarios may be omitted or overlooked.

Boundary value analysis is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Boundary value analysis is a technique that tests boundary values between partitions of equivalent data. Boundary values are values at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Boundary value analysis can be used to test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify boundary values for the input amount, such as the minimum and maximum amount allowed by the system or the user’s account. However, boundary value analysis may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not have boundary values or may not be related to input values.

Equivalence class partitioning is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Equivalence class partitioning is a technique that divides the input data and output results of a software component into partitions of equivalent data. Each partition should contain data that is treated in the same way by the component. Equivalence class partitioning can be used to test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify equivalence partitions for the input amount, such as valid amount (within the range allowed by the system and the user’s account) and invalid amount (outside the range allowed by the system or the user’s account). However, equivalence class partitioning may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not be related to input values or may have more than two partitions. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 34-46.

The extent of testing required for a software product depends on various factors, such as the level of risk, the budget, and the time available. The level of risk reflects the potential impact of failures on the stakeholders and the environment. The budget determines how much resources can be allocated for testing. The time available defines the schedule and deadlines for testing activities. The particular tester involved in testing is not a deciding factor for the extent of testing required, as testing should be based on objective criteria and not on personal preferences or abilities. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 14-15.

Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is performed to verify that specific defects have been successfully fixed.

Option A: "Testing due to the application of a new version of the interface" would typically involve regression testing, not confirmation testing.

Option B: "Testing that fixes resolved the defects in the search function" fits the description of confirmation testing as it focuses on ensuring that specific issues have been addressed.

Option C: "Testing if a system still works after update of an operating system" is an example of regression testing, as it checks the overall system behavior after an update.

Option D: "Testing to ensure the adding of new functionalities haven't broken existing functions" is another example of re​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​ it checks for unintended consequences of new changes.

Therefore, the correct answer is B【6†source】【9†source】.

Problems in defining the right requirements is not a product risk, but rather a project risk. A product risk is a risk that affects the quality or performance of the software product itself, such as poor usability, failure-prone functionality, security vulnerabilities, compatibility issues, etc. A project risk is a risk that affects the management or delivery of the software project itself, such as unrealistic schedule, insufficient resources, unclear scope, changing requirements, etc. The other options are examples of product risks, as they relate to the software product’s characteristics or features. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 12.

Debugging the software to find the reason for defects is not a common objective of testing, but rather a task of development or maintenance. Debugging is a process of locating and fixing errors in the software code, while testing is a process of finding and reporting defects in the software behavior or quality. Testing does not aim to fix defects, but rather to provide information on their existence and impact. The other options are common objectives of testing. Finding defects in the software is one of the main objectives of testing, as it helps to improve the quality and reliability of the software. Preventing defects is another objective of testing, as it helps to avoid rework and reduce costs and risks. Providing information on the status of the system is another objective of testing, as it helps to support decision making and risk management. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

This scenario is using a walkthrough review type and a perspective-based review technique. In a walkthrough, the author of the document leads the meeting and it typically includes a meeting leader and a scribe, as described. This type of review is informal, focuses on discussion, and often involves scenario-based reading of the document to understand different user perspectives​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

Test Management tools are designed to support the planning, execution, and monitoring of the testing process. They provide features for managing test cases, test runs, tracking defects, and reporting on testing activities. However, the statement in option C describes Test Management tools as monitoring and reporting on the system's behavior during testing activities, which is not accurate. Test Management tools focus on the testing process itself rather than on the behavior of the system under test.

Test data preparation tools (A) indeed create and manage test data for use during test execution.

Test execution tools (B) automate the execution of test cases and the comparison of actual outcomes against expected results.

Test comparators (D) are tools that compare actual outcomes with expected outcomes, highlighting discrepancies.

Therefore, option C is the correct answer as it inaccurately describes the function of Test Management tools.

This answer is correct because in Agile software development, work product documentation, such as user stories, acceptance criteria, or test cases, tends to be lightweight and concise, as the focus is on working software and frequent communication rather than comprehensive documentation. Manual tests tend to be often unscripted, as they are often produced using experience-based test techniques, such as error guessing or exploratory testing, which rely on the tester’s skills, knowledge, and creativity to find defects and provide feedback. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.2, Section 3.2.1.2

Traceability is the ability to trace the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Traceability can provide various benefits for the testing process, such as improving the test coverage, the test quality, the test efficiency, and the test communication. However, not all the statements given are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products. The statement that is not true is option C, which says that test objectives should be the same for all test levels, although the number of tests designed at various levels can vary significantly. This statement is false, because test objectives are the goals or the purposes of testing, which can vary depending on the test level, the test type, the test technique, the test environment, the test stakeholder, etc. Test objectives can be defined in terms of the test basis, the test coverage, the test quality, the test risk, the test cost, the test time, etc. Test objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, and they should be aligned with the project objectives and the quality characteristics. Test objectives should not be the same for all test levels, as different test levels have different focuses, scopes, and perspectives of testing, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. The other statements are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products, such as:

Traceability can be useful for assessing the impact of a change to a test basis item on the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to identify which tests are affected by a change in the test basis, such as a new requirement, a modified design, a revised risk, etc., and to determine the necessary actions to update, re-execute, or re-evaluate the tests. Traceability can also help to estimate the effort, the cost, and the time needed to implement the change and to verify its impact on the software system.

Traceability can be useful for determining how many test basis items are covered by the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to measure the test coverage, which is the degree to which the test basis is exercised by the test cases. Traceability can help to identify which test basis items are covered, partially covered, or not covered by the tests, and to evaluate the adequacy, the completeness, and the effectiveness of the testing process. Traceability can also help to identify the gaps, the overlaps, or the redundancies in the test coverage, and to prioritize, optimize, or improve the test cases.

Traceability can be useful to support the needs required by the auditing of testing: This statement is true, because traceability can help to provide evidence, documentation, and justification for the testing activities, results, and outcomes. Traceability can help to demonstrate that the testing process follows the standards, the regulations, the policies, and the best practices that are applicable to the software system, the project, or the organization. Traceability can also help to verify that the testing process meets the expectations, the needs, and the satisfaction of the users and the stakeholders. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.1, Test Planning1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.2, Test Monitoring and Control1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.3, Test Analysis and Design1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Traceability, Test Basis, Test Artifact, Test Objective, Test Level, Test Coverage, Test Quality, Test Risk, Test Cost, Test Time2

This answer is correct because shift-left in testing is an approach that aims to perform testing activities as early as possible in the software development lifecycle, in order to find and fix defects faster and cheaper, and to improve the quality of the software product. Continuous integration is a practice that supports shift-left in testing, as it involves integrating and testing the software components frequently, usually several times a day, using automated tools and processes. Continuous integration can reduce the time between the introduction of a defect and its detection, thereby reducing the cost to fix it and the risk of accumulating defects that could affect the functionality or performance of the software product. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.3, Section 3.2.1.3

Configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains consistency among work products throughout their life cycle. Configuration management affects testing in various ways, such as:

Proper configuration management ensures that testers can uniquely identify the tested item, which can help traceability, reproducibility and accountability.

Proper configuration management ensures that testers have access to consistent versions of software components and testware, which can help reliability, compatibility and efficiency.

Proper configuration management ensures that testers can track changes and defects in software components and testware, which can help verification, validation and reporting.

Proper configuration management ensures that testers can control the configuration of the test environment, which can help stability, security and performance. Configuration management is not a prerequisite for test planning, as test planning can proceed without configuration management, although it may be less effective or accurate. Configuration management is not important for developers only, but for testers as well, as it affects the quality and consistency of the testing process and products. Configuration management has a significant influence on the test project, as it affects various aspects of testing, such as traceability, reproducibility, reliability, compatibility, efficiency, verification, validation, reporting, stability, security and performance. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 6, page 60-61.

Testers are typically involved in creating detailed test execution schedules, among other tasks such as designing tests, executing tests, and logging defects. Creating a test strategy and test policy, promoting and advocating the test team, and introducing metrics are typically responsibilities of test managers or senior roles.

In the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, the responsibilities of testers include creating test cases, setting up test​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​nts, executing tests, and reporting defects, which align with creating detailed test execution schedules【6†source】.

State transition testing is a black-box testing technique where test cases are designed to cover states and transitions of a state machine.

Given the state model with the following transitions:

PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION

IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED

IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED

SHIPPED -> INVOICED

INVOICED -> CANCELLED

CANCELLED -> PLACED

To cover all transitions at least once, we need to create a sequence that covers all six transitions.

Option A: IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED -> PLACED

- Misses SHIPPED -> INVOICED and INVOICED -> CANCELLED transitions.

Option B: IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> INVOICED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION

- Covers all transitions.

Option C: PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> CANCELLED ​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​sses INVOICED -> CANCELLED transition.

Option D: PLACED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED

- Misses SHIPPED -> INVOICED and INVOICED -> CANCELLED transitions.

Given these, Option B covers all the transitions【6†source】【9†source】.

Failures can be caused by defects, but also by environmental conditions. A failure is an event in which the software system does not perform a required function or performs a function incorrectly, according to the expected behavior. A defect is a flaw in the software system or a deviation from the requirements or the specifications, that may cause a failure. However, not all failures are caused by defects, as some failures may be caused by environmental conditions, such as hardware malfunctions, network interruptions, power outages, incompatible configurations, etc. Environmental conditions are factors that affect the operation of the software system, but are not part of the software system itself. The other statements are false, because:

A defect does not always produce a failure, while a bug always produces a failure. This statement is false, because a defect may or may not produce a failure, depending on the inputs, the outputs, the states, or the scenarios of the software system, and a bug is just another term for a defect, so it has the same possibility of producing a failure as a defect. For example, a defect in a rarely used feature or a hidden branch of the code may never produce a failure, while a defect in a frequently used feature or a critical path of the code may produce a failure often. A bug is not a different concept from a defect, but rather a synonym or a colloquial term for a defect, so it has the same definition and implications as a defect.

A defect may cause a failure which, when occurring, always causes an error. This statement is false, because an error is not a consequence of a failure, but rather a cause of a defect. An error is a human action or a mistake that produces a defect in the software system, such as a typo, a logic flaw, a requirement misunderstanding, etc. An error is not observable in the software system, but rather in the human mind or the human work products, such as the code, the design, the documentation, etc. A failure is not a cause of an error, but rather a result of a defect, which is a result of an error. For example, an error in the code may cause a defect in the software system, which may cause a failure in the software behavior.

Bugs are defects found during component testing, while failures are defects found at higher test levels. This statement is false, because bugs and failures are not different types of defects, but rather different terms for defects and their manifestations. As mentioned before, bugs are just another word for defects, and failures are the events in which the software system does not perform as expected due to defects. Bugs and failures can be found at any test level, not only at component testing or higher test levels. Test levels are the stages of testing that correspond to the levels of integration of the software system, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Defects and failures can occur and be detected at any test level, depending on the test objectives, the test basis, the test techniques, and the test environment. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.2, Testing and Quality1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.1, Testing Principles1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.3.1, Testing in Software Development Lifecycles1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Failure, Defect, Bug, Environmental Condition, Error, Test Level2

A formal review is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. A formal review can have various roles involved, such as manager, moderator, author, reviewer and scribe. The manager responsibilities in formal review include all except one of the following:

Planning the review (correct responsibility)

Determines if the review objectives have been met (incorrect responsibility)

Decide on the execution of reviews (correct responsibility)

Allocate time for review (correct responsibility) The responsibility of determining if the review objectives have been met belongs to the moderator role, not to the manager role. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 28-29.

An exit criterion is a condition that defines when a test activity has been completed or when a test phase can be concluded. An exit criterion can be based on various factors, such as:

I) Estimates of defect density or reliability measures. These are quantitative measures that indicate how many defects are present in the software product or how likely it is to fail under certain conditions. These can be used as exit criteria to ensure that the software product meets a certain level of quality or performance before moving to the next phase or releasing it to the customer.

III) Accuracy measures, such as code coverage, functionality coverage or risk coverage. These are quantitative measures that indicate how much of the software product has been tested in terms of its code, functionality or risk. These can be used as exit criteria to ensure that the test suite is adequate or complete before moving to the next phase or releasing it to the customer.

IV) Residual risks, such as lack of code coverage in certain areas, unresolved defects or unknown factors. These are qualitative measures that indicate the remaining risks or uncertainties associated with the software product after testing. These can be used as exit criteria to ensure that the residual risks are acceptable or manageable before moving to the next phase or releasing it to the customer. The following factor is not a valid exit criterion:

II) The completion and publication of an exhaustive Test Report. This is not a valid exit criterion, as it does not reflect the quality or completeness of the testing process or product. A test report is a document that summarizes the results and outcomes of a test activity or phase. A test report can be used as an input for deciding whether to exit a test activity or phase, but it is not a condition that defines when to exit. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 2, page 13; Chapter 6, page 58-59.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Non-functional testing evaluates attributes like performance, security, and usability, which are typically assessed at the system test level or higher (A). It is not restricted to acceptance testing (B), goes beyond security and performance testing (C), and covers more than just user experience (D).

The three-point test estimation technique is a method of estimating the test effort based on three initial estimates: the most optimistic, the most likely, and the most pessimistic. The technique uses a weighted average of these three estimates to calculate the final estimate, which is also known as the expected value. The formula for the expected value is:

Expected value = (most optimistic + 4 * most likely + most pessimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the expected value is:

Expected value = (6 + 4 * 30 + 54) / 6 Expected value = 30 person hours

However, the expected value is not the only factor to consider when estimating the test effort. The technique also calculates the standard deviation, which is a measure of the variability or uncertainty of the estimates. The formula for the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (most pessimistic - most optimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (54 - 6) / 6 Standard deviation = 8 person hours

The standard deviation can be used to determine a range of possible values for the test effort, based on a certain level of confidence. For example, using a 68% confidence level, the range is:

Expected value ± standard deviation

Using the calculated values, the range is:

30 ± 8 person hours

Therefore, the final estimate is between 22 person hours and 38 person hours, which is option A.

Statement Testing is a type of white-box testing technique where the test cases are designed based on the implementation of the software, specifically aiming to execute every statement in the code at least once. This falls under the category of structure-based testing (also known as white-box testing), where the internal structure of the system is used to design test cases. Therefore, option D is correct​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

A test progress report provides an overview of testing activities, metrics, and identified risks. It focuses on tracking testing progress rather than evaluating overall product quality (B), which is typically included in a test summary report after testing is completed.

(A) is correct because obstacles (challenges) are reported to ensure test execution stays on track.

(C) is correct as test metrics help stakeholders track execution progress.

(D) is correct because new or changed risks impact test focus and priorities.

A test progress report tracks execution and informs stakeholders about ongoing testing activities.

The key difference between a peer review of code and static analysis of code using a tool lies in their approaches and scope. A peer review is a manual inspection of the code by peers or colleagues, focusing not only on the technical aspects of the code but also on other elements such as design, compliance with standards, and maintainability. Peer reviews can identify defects, suggest improvements, and ensure that the code adheres to best practices and team standards.

On the other hand, static analysis is an automated process performed by tools designed to analyze the code without executing it. These tools can detect potential issues such as syntax errors, vulnerabilities, and code smells based on predefined rules and patterns. While static analysis is technically focused, it lacks the broader perspective that human reviewers can provide, such as evaluating the code's maintainability or adherence to project-specific standards. Therefore, static analysis targets the code technically, whereas peer review encompasses a wider range of aspects, making option B the correct answer.

Effort estimate does not depend on the budget of the project, but rather on the scope, complexity, and quality of the software product and the testing activities1. Budget is a constraint that may affect the feasibility and accuracy of the effort estimate, but it is not a factor that determines the effort estimate. Effort estimate is the amount of work required to complete the testing activities, measured in terms of person-hours, person-days, or person-months2.

The other options are correct because:

A. Once the test effort is estimated, resources can be identified and a schedule can be drawn up, as they are interrelated aspects of the test planning process3. Resources are the people, tools, equipment, and facilities needed to perform the testing activities4. Schedule is the time frame and sequence of the testing activities, aligned with the project milestones and deadlines5.

B. Effort estimate can be inaccurate because the quality of the product under tests is not known, as it affects the number and severity of the defects that may be found and the rework that may be needed to fix them6. Quality is the degree to which the software product satisfies the specified requirements and meets the needs and expectations of the users and clients7.

D. Experience based estimation is one of the estimation techniques, which relies on the judgment and expertise of the testers and other project stakeholders to estimate the test effort based on similar projects or tasks done in the past. Experience based estimation can be useful when there is a lack of historical data, formal methods, or detailed information about the software product and the testing activities.

References =

1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 154

2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 155

3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 156

4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 157

5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 158

6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 159

7 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 16

[8] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 160

[9] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 161

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Independent testers provide a fresh perspective and are more likely to identify failures that developers might overlook due to their familiarity with the software (C). Independent testing helps avoid cognitive biases, improves defect detection, and enhances the overall quality assurance process. While A and D touch on related concepts, they do not directly define the benefit as well as C does. Option B highlights a potential challenge rather than a benefit.

All testing levels are applicable, independent of which software development life-cycle process (V-model, iterative, incremental) is used. Testing levels are defined based on the scope and objectives of testing, not on the software development model. Component testing, integration testing, system testing and acceptance testing are common testing levels that can be applied to any software development model, as long as they are planned and executed properly. The V-model is a software development model that emphasizes the relationship between each development phase and its corresponding testing phase. Iterative and incremental models are software development models that divide the development process into smaller cycles or iterations, where each iteration produces a working version of the software that can be tested and evaluated. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 18.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Checklist-based testing uses specific test conditions (B) that help testers ensure key aspects are validated. The checklist items can be derived from past defects, requirements, or regulatory standards.

(A) is incorrect because general guidelines lack specificity.

(C) is incorrect because checklists can be used for both manual and automated testing.

(D) is incorrect because checklists are useful for both functional and non-functional testing (e.g., security, performance).

Checklists help ensure completeness without enforcing strictly scripted execution.

Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique where testers actively engage with the software, learning about its behavior while simultaneously designing and executing tests. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, exploratory testing can be structured into sessions guided by test charters, which outline the test objectives and provide direction for the testers' exploration. This method is particularly useful in situations where test documentation is limited or where rapid feedback is needed. Thus, option B correctly describes how exploratory testing can be organized​​.

The correct matching of the topics with their descriptions is as follows:

Functional behaviour: The externally observable behaviour with user actions as input operating under certain configurations (A to C).

Quality characteristics: How the system performs the specific behaviour (B to A).

Scenarios: A sequence of actions between an external actor and the system, to accomplish a specific goal or business task (C to B).

Business rules: Activities that can only be performed in the system under certain conditions defined by outside procedures and constraints (D to E).

External interfaces: Description of the connections between the system to be developed and the outside world (E to D)​​.

Experience based techniques (EBT) are techniques that use the knowledge, intuition and skills of the test engineers to design and execute tests. EBT use tests derived from the test engineers’ previous experience with similar technologies, domains, applications or systems. EBT are not based on the ability of the test engineer to implement various testing techniques, but rather on their personal judgment and creativity. EBT are not done as a second stage of testing, after non-experience-based testing took place, but rather as a complementary or alternative approach to other techniques. EBT require broad and deep knowledge in both testing and the application or technological domain, as this can help the test engineer identify potential risks, scenarios or defects. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 5, page 48-49.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Decision rules define possible combinations of conditions and outcomes.

For this scenario:

Bulk discount has 3 categories (0%, 5%, 10%)

Frequent customer discount has 2 categories (Yes = +5%, No = 0%)

The total number of decision rules is:

3 bulk discount options × 2 frequent customer options = 6 rules.

Thus, the correct answer is 6 decision rules (B).

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Boundary Value Analysis (BVA) focuses on test cases at the edges of partitions because defects often occur at boundaries. The temperature ranges are:

≤7 (Too cold → W)

[8-21] (Standstill → X)

[22-29] (Ideal → Y)

≥30 (Too hot → Z)

A two-point BVA means testing both the lower and upper boundary values of each partition.

The correct selection {7,8,21,22,29,30} includes:

7 → Boundary of Too Cold (W)

8 → Lower boundary of Standstill (X)

21 → Upper boundary of Standstill (X)

22 → Lower boundary of Ideal (Y)

29 → Upper boundary of Ideal (Y)

30 → Lower boundary of Too Hot (Z)

This ensures maximum boundary coverage.

The test levels and their objectives can be matched as follows:

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the system are as designed and specified (A3: System testing).

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the interfaces are as designed (B2: Integration testing).

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the components are as designed and specified (C1: Component testing).

Establishing confidence in the quality of the system as a whole (D4: Acceptance testing)​​.

Decision tables are used to model complex decision logic by considering different combinations of conditions and actions. Based on the given decision table for prescribing drug therapy:

Column 1 and Column 3 both result in the same actions (prescribing Amoxicillin).

These columns can be merged because the actions taken do not depend on whether the patient is taking anticoagulant therapy (both are 'T' for this condition).

Thus, combining these columns simplifies the decision table without losing any information.

To achieve the highest level of transition coverage, one must consider all the possible transitions between the states in the given state model of the sales order software. The transitions in the sequence provided in Option B - "IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> INVOICED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION" cover all the states and transitions effectively. This covers the transitions from IN PRODUCTION to SHIPPED, SHIPPED to INVOICED, INVOICED to CANCELLED, CANCELLED to PLACED, and PLACED to IN PRODUCTION, thereby maximizing the transition coverage.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The whole-team approach promotes collaboration among stakeholders (business representatives, developers, and testers) to ensure better quality and project success (A). This approach allows for early identification of issues, enhances shared responsibility, and improves software quality. Option C is a valid but indirect benefit, while options B and D do not directly describe the core advantage of the whole-team approach.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Business, development, and testing (C) are the three key perspectives in agile user story refinement:

Business (Product Owner, Stakeholders) – Ensures the story aligns with user needs and business goals.

Development (Developers) – Provides insights on feasibility and technical constraints.

Testing (Testers, QA) – Ensures testability, acceptance criteria, and risk identification.

(A) is incorrect because the product owner is part of business stakeholders.

(B) is incorrect because architecture is part of development, but not the primary driver of user stories.

(D) is incorrect because acceptance testing is a process, not a stakeholder group.

A cross-functional team collaboration ensures well-defined, testable, and feasible user stories.

In a formal review process, the recorder's role is typically responsible for documenting the findings of the review team, including action items, decisions, and recommendations. This ensures that there is an accurate record of what was discussed and agreed upon, facilitating follow-up and continuous improvement. Therefore, statement C is correct as per the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

The statement that refers to good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model is option D, which says that involvement of testers in work product reviews should occur as early as possible to take advantage of the early testing principle. Work product reviews are static testing techniques, in which the work products of the software development process, such as the requirements, the design, the code, the test cases, etc., are examined by one or more reviewers, with or without the author, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Involvement of testers in work product reviews can provide various benefits for the testing process, such as improving the test quality, the test efficiency, and the test communication. The early testing principle states that testing activities should start as early as possible in the software development lifecycle, and should be performed iteratively and continuously throughout the lifecycle. Applying the early testing principle can help to prevent, detect, and remove defects at an early stage, when they are easier, cheaper, and faster to fix, as well as to reduce the risk, the cost, and the time of the testing process. The other options are not good testing practices to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, but rather specific testing practices that may or may not be applicable or beneficial for testing, depending on the context and the objectives of the testing activities, such as:

Tests should be written in executable format before the code is written and should act as executable specifications that drive coding: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with test-driven development, which is an approach to software development and testing, in which the developers write automated unit tests before writing the source code, and then refactor the code until the tests pass. Test-driven development can help to improve the quality, the design, and the maintainability of the code, as well as to provide fast feedback and guidance for the developers. However, test-driven development is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be feasible, suitable, or effective for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the requirements are unclear, unstable, or complex, when the test automation tools or skills are not available or adequate, when the testing objectives or levels are not aligned with the unit testing, etc.

Test levels should be defined such that the exit criteria of one level are part of the entry criteria for the next level: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with sequential software development models, such as the waterfall model, the V-model, or the W-model, in which the software development and testing activities are performed in a linear and sequential order, with well-defined phases, deliverables, and dependencies. Test levels are the stages of testing that correspond to the levels of integration of the software system, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Test levels should have clear and measurable entry criteria and exit criteria, which are the conditions that must be met before starting or finishing a test level. In sequential software development models, the exit criteria of one test level are usually part of the entry criteria for the next test level, to ensure that the software system is ready and stable for the next level of testing. However, this is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be relevant, flexible, or efficient for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the software development and testing activities are performed in an iterative and incremental order, with frequent changes, feedback, and adaptations, as in agile software development models, such as Scrum, Kanban, or XP, when the test levels are not clearly defined or distinguished, or when the test levels are performed in parallel or concurrently, etc.

Test objectives should be the same for all test levels, although the number of tests designed at various levels can vary significantly: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with uniform software development models, such as the spiral model, the incremental model, or the prototyping model, in which the software development and testing activities are performed in a cyclical and repetitive manner, with similar phases, deliverables, and processes. Test objectives are the goals or the purposes of testing, which can vary depending on the test level, the test type, the test technique, the test environment, the test stakeholder, etc. Test objectives can be defined in terms of the test basis, the test coverage, the test quality, the test risk, the test cost, the test time, etc. Test objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, and they should be aligned with the project objectives and the quality characteristics. In uniform software development models, the test objectives may be the same for all test levels, as the testing process is repeated for each cycle or iteration, with similar focus, scope, and perspective of testing. However, this is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be appropriate, realistic, or effective for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the software development and testing activities are performed in a hierarchical and modular manner, with different phases, deliverables, and dependencies, as in sequential software development models, such as the waterfall model, the V-model, or the W-model, when the test objectives vary according to the test levels, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing, or when the test objectives change according to the feedback, the learning, or the adaptation of the testing process, as in agile software development models, such as Scrum, Kanban, or XP, etc. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.1, Testing and the Software Development Lifecycle1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.1, Testing Principles1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.3.1, Testing in Software Development Lifecycles1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.1, Test Planning1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.2, Test Monitoring and Control1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.3, Test Analysis and Design1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.4, Test Implementation1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.5, Test Execution1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.6, Test Closure1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Work Product Review, Static Testing, Early Testing, Test-driven Development, Test Level, Entry Criterion, Exit Criterion, Test Objective, Test Basis, Test Coverage, Test Quality, Test Risk, Test Cost, Test Time2

In Agile teams using the planning poker technique for estimating user stories, it is common practice to have further discussions and rounds of estimation if there is a significant discrepancy in the initial estimates. This helps in reaching a consensus and ensures that all team members understand the complexity and requirements of the user story. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, planning poker involves discussions to clarify differences in estimates, especially when there is a wide range of values selected. By having Memb6 and Memb4, who provided the most pessimistic and optimistic estimates, explain their reasoning, it fosters a deeper understanding and encourages the team to converge towards a more accurate and agreed-upon estimate.

A unit test framework tool is a tool that supports the creation, execution, and reporting of unit tests, which are tests that verify the functionality and quality of individual software components (such as functions or methods) in source code. A unit test framework tool can help to detect defects in functions or methods in source code by providing features such as test case generation, test case execution, test result comparison, test coverage measurement, etc. Some examples of unit test framework tools are JUnit, NUnit, TestNG, etc. The other options are not tools that are likely to detect defects in functions or methods in source code. A configuration management tool is a tool that supports the management and control of different versions and variants of software products or components. A test design tool is a tool that supports the design and generation of test cases based on some criteria or rules. A monitoring tool is a tool that monitors the behavior or performance of a system or component under test. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 10.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Configuration management (B) ensures that versions of software and test artifacts are properly tracked, stored, and retrievable. It allows teams to:

Restore earlier versions of software and test work products

Maintain traceability between requirements, tests, and code

Avoid discrepancies due to mismanaged versions

(A) is incorrect because defect management tracks issues but does not restore versions.

(C) is incorrect because change management controls changes but does not track past versions.

(D) is incorrect because risk management assesses risks but does not manage software versions.

Effective configuration management ensures the ability to roll back changes and maintain system stability.

Testing can contribute to higher quality by helping to measure the quality of software. Quality is defined as the degree to which a component or system satisfies specified requirements and customer or user needs and expectations. Testing is a process of evaluating a component or system by applying inputs and observing outputs, and comparing them with expected results. Testing can help to measure the quality of software by providing information on its functionality, performance, usability, security, reliability, etc. Testing can also help to identify and report defects in software, which can lead to improvement actions and quality assurance activities. The other options are not accurate descriptions of how testing can contribute to higher quality. Testing does not ensure that remaining defects are documented, but rather that detected defects are reported. Testing does not remove errors in software, but rather finds defects in software behavior or quality. Testing does not eliminate the risk with software, but rather assesses and manages the risk with software. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

This question relates to identifying product risks, which are potential problems associated with the product itself, such as software functionality, reliability, usability, and performance. Option A describes a scenario where the application might not meet performance requirements under specific conditions (up to 300 concurrent users), which directly impacts the product's ability to perform its intended function. This is a classic example of a product risk, as it concerns the product's quality and its ability to meet user needs. Options B, C, and D, on the other hand, relate to project risks, which are concerns related to the management and execution of the project, such as tool acquisition, environment configuration, and team expertise, rather than the quality of the product itself.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Acceptance criteria 8 states that the system should charge the user on the first business day of the following month. However, the test cycle only verified monthly payments for over a year, without confirming whether payments were processed specifically on the first business day.

(B) is incorrect because the test validated monthly and annual payment options.

(C) is incorrect because not all criteria were fully validated.

(D) is incorrect because OTP verification (6) was tested as part of registration.

Ensuring timely execution of payments (Criteria 8) requires additional validation.

Test-Driven Development (TDD) emphasizes writing tests before code and includes refactoring as a key practice to improve both the tests and the code. This ensures that the codebase remains clean and maintainable. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 discusses TDD as a practice that includes writing tests first, coding to satisfy those tests, and then refactoring the code to improve its structure and readability while keeping the tests intact​​.

Use cases describe a system's behavior as it responds to a request from a user. They typically consist of various scenarios, such as basic flow, alternative flow, and exceptional flow, which represent possible behaviors when a user interacts with the system. When deriving test cases from use cases, it is important to cover these different types of user behaviors.

Test cases should be designed to verify how the system behaves during each of these scenarios. This ensures that the system operates correctly for normal and error conditions encountered by human users or systems interacting with the application. Thus, test cases derived from use cases aim to cover basic, exceptional, and alternative flows, ensuring comprehensive coverage.

When developers are trying to identify and remove a defect, they need clear information on what went wrong and what was expected. The items that will be most useful to developers in this context are the expected results (item 1), the actual results (item 2), and a description of the defect including steps to reproduce, screenshots, and database dumps (item 5). This information helps developers understand the nature of the defect and provides the necessary details to reproduce and diagnose the issue effectively.

Test exit criteria are the conditions that must be fulfilled before concluding a particular testing phase. These criteria act as a checkpoint to assess whether we have achieved the testing objectives and are done with testing1. Test exit criteria are typically defined in the test plan document, which is one of the outputs of the test planning phase. The test plan document describes the scope, approach, resources, and schedule of the testing activities. It also identifies the test items, the features to be tested, the testing tasks, the risks, and the test deliverables2. According to the ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, the test plan document should include the following information related to the test exit criteria3:

The criteria for evaluating test completion, such as the percentage of test cases executed, the percentage of test coverage achieved, the number and severity of defects found and fixed, the quality and reliability of the software product, and the stakeholder satisfaction.

The criteria for evaluating test process improvement, such as the adherence to the test strategy, the efficiency and effectiveness of the testing activities, the lessons learned and best practices identified, and the recommendations for future improvements.

Therefore, the test plan document is the most appropriate test document to find the test exit criteria described. The other options, such as test design specification, project plan, and requirements specification, are not directly related to the test exit criteria. The test design specification describes the test cases and test procedures for a specific test level or test type3. The project plan describes the overall objectives, scope, assumptions, risks, and deliverables of the software project4. The requirements specification describes the functional and non-functional requirements of the software product5. None of these documents specify the conditions for ending the testing process or evaluating the testing outcomes. References = ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing | Baeldung on Computer Science, Entry And Exit Criteria In Software Testing - Rishabh Software, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing Life Cycle - STLC [2022 Updated] - Testsigma Blog, ISTQB® releases Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0 (CTFL).

The minimum number of test cases needed to cover every unique sequence of up to 3 states/2 transitions starting in the “Start” state and ending in the “End” state is 4. This is because there are 4 unique sequences of up to 3 states/2 transitions starting in the “Start” state and ending in the “End” state:

Start -> Bet -> End

Start -> Deal -> End

Start -> 1st Deal -> End

Start -> 2nd Deal -> End References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents.

The fact that defects are usually not evenly distributed among the various modules that make up a software application, but rather their distribution tend to reflect the Pareto principle, is expressed by the testing principle referred to as ‘Defects cluster together’. This principle states that a small number of modules contain most of the defects detected, or that a small number of causes are responsible for most of the defects. This principle can be used to guide the test analysis and design activities, by prioritizing the testing of the most critical or risky modules, or by applying more rigorous test techniques to them. Therefore, option C is the correct answer.

Statement coverage is a white-box test technique which focuses on executing all possible statements in the code at least once during testing. This helps in determining the percentage of executable statements that have been executed by the test suite, aiming to ensure that all parts of the program have been tested at least once​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

Covering all transitions at least once is the highest coverage criterion for state transition based test cases, because it ensures that every possible change of state is tested at least once. This means that all the events that trigger the transitions, as well as the actions and outputs that result from the transitions, are verified. Covering all transitions at least once also implies covering all states at least once, but not vice versa. Therefore, option D is not the highest coverage criterion. Option C is the lowest coverage criterion, because it only tests the initial and final states of the system or component, without checking the intermediate states or transitions. Option A is incorrect, because the coverage criteria for state transition based test cases can be determined and compared based on the number of transitions and states covered. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 4.2.3, page 49-50.

An incident report is a document that records the details of an incident. An incident report typically contains the following items:

Identifier: A unique identifier for the incident report

Summary: A concise summary of the incident

Description: A detailed description of the incident, including the steps to reproduce it, the expected and actual results, and any relevant screenshots or logs

Severity: The degree of impact that the incident has on the system

Priority: The level of urgency for resolving the incident

Status: The current state of the incident, such as new, open, resolved, closed, etc.

Resolution: The action taken to resolve the incident, such as fix, workaround, reject, etc. Based on the information given in the question, the tester would be able to write down all of these items except for the test case identifier. A test case identifier is a unique identifier for a test case that is used to link it to other test artifacts, such as test plans, test scripts, test results or incident reports. However, since the tester is performing exploratory testing, there is no predefined test case that can be associated with the incident. Exploratory testing is an approach to testing that emphasizes learning, test design and test execution at the same time. Exploratory testing relies on the tester’s skills, creativity and intuition to explore the software under test and discover defects. Exploratory testing does not use formal test cases or scripts, but rather uses test charters or missions that guide the tester’s actions and objectives. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33; Chapter 5, page 47-48.

Behavior-Driven Development (BDD) is a collaborative approach that enhances communication among project stakeholders, including developers, testers, and business analysts. It involves defining how software should behave through examples written in a common language understandable by all stakeholders, often using the Given-When-Then format​​.

Risk level is determined by the combination of two factors: the likelihood of an event occurring and the impact or harm that could result from that event. This approach allows risks to be prioritized based on their potential effect on the project or system. The likelihood represents the probability of the risk event occurring, while the impact represents the severity of the consequences if the event does happen. This concept is fundamental in risk-based testing and helps guide decision-making during the testing process.

The question is about identifying an example of testing contributing to higher quality. Quality is the degree to which a component, system or process meets specified requirements and/or user/customer needs and expectations1. Testing is the process consisting of all lifecycle activities, both static and dynamic, concerned with planning, preparation and evaluation of software products and related work products to determine that they satisfy specified requirements, to demonstrate that they are fit for purpose and to detect defects2.

Therefore, testing contributes to higher quality by verifying and validating that the software products and related work products meet the specified requirements, are fit for purpose and have no defects, or at least have a reduced number of defects. Testing also provides information about the quality of the software products and related work products to the stakeholders, who can make informed decisions based on the test results3.

Out of the four given statements, only option D is an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it shows that testing has detected a defect (a flaw in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function4) and that the defect has been resolved (fixed and confirmed) prior to release (delivery of the software product to the customer or end user). This means that testing has prevented a potential failure (an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits) from occurring in the operational environment, and thus has improved the quality of the software product.

Option A is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a reporting activity that summarizes the test results and evaluates the test objectives, but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test summary report is a document that records and communicates the outcomes of testing activities, including test completion criteria, test results, incident reports, test summary and evaluation, and lessons learned.

Option B is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a planning activity that estimates the resources and time needed for testing activities, but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test effort estimate is an approximation of the amount of work and/or the duration of time required to perform testing activities.

Option C is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a preparation activity that sets up the test environment (an environment containing hardware, instrumentation, simulators, software tools, and other support elements needed to conduct a test), but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test environment installation is a process of installing and configuring the test environment according to the test environment specification.

In maintenance testing, the relationship between impact analysis and regression testing is that the impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on an existing software product after it has been delivered or deployed, in order to ensure that it still meets its requirements and functions correctly after a change or a modification. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various reasons, such as corrective maintenance (fixing defects), adaptive maintenance (adapting to new environments), perfective maintenance (improving performance), preventive maintenance (avoiding future problems), etc. Impact analysis is a technique that is used to assess the extent and nature of changes introduced by maintenance activities on the software product or project. Impact analysis helps to identify which parts of the software product are affected by the changes, which parts need to be modified or updated accordingly, which parts need to be retested or verified for correctness or compatibility, etc. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change or a modification. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of maintenance activities on the software product’s functionality or quality. Regression testing can be performed at various levels and scopes depending on the impact analysis results. Therefore, in maintenance testing, impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 20.

Being part of the support team means that the testers are closer to the customer perspective, which is an advantage for testing, as they can better understand the user needs and expectations, and identify more realistic scenarios and risks. However, being part of the support team also means that they have less independence in deciding what and how to test, as they may be influenced by the customer’s preferences or requests, which could compromise the objectivity and effectiveness of testing. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 6.