CTFL-AcT ISTQB Certified Tester - Acceptance Testing (CT-AcT) Questions and Answers

An acceptance test summary report is a high-level document produced at the end of acceptance testing. It provides stakeholders (especially business owners and decision-makers) with essential information to determine whether the system meets the acceptance criteria and whether it is ready for release.

Option A is correct because understanding the residual risk — based on test results, open defects, and coverage — is critical for release decisions. The summary report includes test execution status, significant findings, defect summaries, and an overall risk assessment.

Other options:

B (technical details on defect fixes) belong more in defect or technical reports, not in the acceptance summary.

C (test strategy/design methods) are part of the test plan, not the summary report.

D (test procedure info) is operational detail, not suited for a high-level summary report.

Answer: A. Information to evaluate the level of risk for product release.

Acceptance criteria define the conditions under which a user story or requirement is considered complete and acceptable to stakeholders. They clarify the expected behavior, outcomes, or attributes of the system.

Option C is correct because it accurately reflects that acceptance criteria are used to specify what is expected from the system in relation to a given requirement or user story. This ensures a shared understanding among developers, testers, and business stakeholders.

Other options:

A is vague and misleading — acceptance criteria relate directly to specific stories or features, not generally to high-level goals.

B is partially correct but limited — while acceptance criteria help define test conditions, their purpose is broader than just test specification.

D is incorrect — acceptance criteria are not related to code coverage, which is a technical test metric.

Answer: C. For each requirement or user story, the acceptance criteria refine and specify what is expected

ATDD and BDD are agile development approaches that emphasize collaboration among stakeholders (such as business analysts, developers, testers, and customers) to define clear and testable acceptance criteria before or as requirements are being finalized. Both techniques promote using concrete examples to drive development and validate understanding.

In ATDD, acceptance test cases are derived directly from user stories or requirements and written before the actual implementation starts. In BDD, scenarios are expressed in natural language (often using Gherkin syntax) to describe behaviors the system should exhibit under specific conditions. In both cases, these tests serve not only as validation tools but also as executable specifications — i.e., shared understanding expressed through concrete examples.

Option B is correct because both methodologies use examples (scenarios/test cases) to describe how a system should behave — serving as acceptance criteria.

Incorrect options:

Option A wrongly suggests BDD defers testing until after requirements are finalized — it actually promotes early collaboration.

Option C is false — in ATDD, test cases are based on predefined acceptance criteria, not written beforehand.

Option D is inaccurate — acceptance tests in ATDD and BDD may be automated but are collaboratively written first, not by test automation engineers alone.

Exact Reference – ISTQB CTFL Acceptance Testing Syllabus (Section 2.2):

“Both ATDD and BDD involve the collaborative definition of test cases before implementation to clarify requirements and serve as product usage examples.”

UX context analysis evaluates the environment and conditions in which users interact with a product. This includes:

External conditions: lighting, noise, device constraints

Psychological conditions: cognitive load, stress, motivation

These factors influence usability, accessibility, and overall experience.

Option A is correct as it reflects the essence of UX context analysis — understanding the broader user environment to inform design and testing.

Other options:

B describes personas, which are user archetypes used for behavior modeling — more aligned with user profiling.

C focuses on competitor analysis — useful for inspiration, not context analysis.

D involves use cases and workflows — useful for behavior modeling, but not specifically context analysis.

Answer: A. External conditions and psychological conditions are analyzed to derive design decisions

==================

The ISTQB CTFL Acceptance Testing Syllabus emphasizes the importance of collaboration between business analysts and testers throughout the testing lifecycle, especially during test planning and risk identification. Business analysts contribute domain knowledge and business context, which is crucial in identifying business-critical areas, defining priorities, and ensuring that acceptance tests align with business goals.

Option A correctly identifies this collaboration. During test planning, business analysts help define acceptance criteria, identify risks from a business perspective, and support test prioritization to focus on high-value features. Their early involvement ensures that acceptance tests are meaningful and support stakeholder expectations.

Option B is incorrect as business analysts actively review acceptance tests to confirm alignment with business rules, regardless of technical complexity.

Option C is inaccurate because although testers seek to understand business needs, the responsibility for identifying those needs lies with business analysts.

Option D is incorrect; business analysts remain engaged throughout the project lifecycle, including test support and defect triage.

Exact Reference – ISTQB CTFL Acceptance Testing Syllabus (Section 1.4):

“Testers and business analysts collaborate during test planning and analysis activities to ensure the tests meet business needs and risk areas are adequately covered.”

Therefore, A provides the most accurate and comprehensive description.

Acceptance criteria describe the conditions under which a requirement or user story is considered fulfilled. These criteria serve as the basis for deriving acceptance test cases. To transform them into concrete tests, testers apply test design techniques such as:

Business process-based testing (deriving tests from modeled workflows)

Use case testing (based on user interactions with the system)

Option B is correct because it clearly describes how structured techniques are applied to translate acceptance criteria into actionable test cases, ensuring traceability and relevance.

Other options:

A is incorrect — experience-based techniques may supplement, but structured methods are foundational in deriving test cases from defined criteria.

C is misleading — risk-based testing is a well-established and effective practice for prioritizing test efforts, including acceptance testing.

D is incorrect — both functional and non-functional criteria are important; there’s no fixed rule to prioritize one over the other.

Answer: B. Test techniques such as business process-based testing or use case testing can be used to create acceptance tests from the acceptance criteria

In Gherkin syntax (Given-When-Then), the purpose is to describe system behavior in a way that’s understandable to all stakeholders. Test steps should focus on user intentions and observable results — not UI implementation details — to ensure maintainability and abstraction.

Line 3 ("click 'Buy Tickets' button") refers explicitly to a UI element, which should generally be avoided in acceptance tests. Instead, it could say "I request to buy tickets."

Line 7 ("I should provide my personal data") is describing an action the user must take, not an outcome or result. In a Gherkin “Then” step, we expect an observable system response, not further user interaction.

Option C identifies both of these review concerns correctly.

Other options:

A includes an incorrect comment about line 4 ("quantity should not be set") — setting a value is acceptable.

B is false — the test case has reviewable issues.

D might be valid in a different context (e.g., boundary tests), but that’s not a flaw in the existing scenario.

Answer: C. Line 3 refers to an element of the user interface, which is to be avoided and line 7 is an action and not a result

The medical scanner must be able to examine at least 50 patients per day. This requirement directly impacts hospital operations and service efficiency. If the scanner fails to meet performance requirements, such as processing speed or availability, it will affect the hospital’s ability to deliver services to patients — impacting schedules, patient flow, and ultimately the business goals of the hospital.

Option C is correct because it reflects the consequences of performance shortfalls from a business outcome perspective: failure to meet this requirement may result in financial loss, compliance issues, or customer dissatisfaction.

Other options:

A (User perspective) is involved, but the impact here is primarily operational/business.

B (Functional perspective) refers to whether the scanner has the correct features, not performance.

D (Technical perspective) is also relevant, but the business impact (e.g., service delivery) takes precedence in this case.

Answer: C. Business perspective

Bi-directional traceability is a fundamental concept in requirements engineering and test management. It refers to the ability to trace:

Forward: From requirements/user stories to corresponding test cases (to ensure all requirements are covered).

Backward: From test cases to the requirements they validate (to ensure every test aligns with a requirement).

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level and Acceptance Testing syllabi, bi-directional traceability is essential to manage test coverage and ensure completeness. It allows project managers and product owners to assess whether all specified requirements/user stories have been covered by appropriate test cases, helping to identify any untested functionality.

This also supports impact analysis during change management — knowing which test cases will be affected by a change in a requirement.

Option B is correct because it precisely captures this benefit. While Option C refers to reviewing test cases against acceptance criteria (a valid review activity), the bi-directional traceability's key benefit from a management and quality assurance perspective is traceability for coverage.

Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD) is a collaborative approach in which acceptance criteria are defined early, often before implementation starts. Business process models (e.g., BPMN) and business rule models (e.g., DMN) are essential tools to formalize how the system should behave under various conditions.

In ATDD, these models provide a structured representation of system workflows and decision logic, which can then be used by testers and stakeholders to derive or generate acceptance tests. This ensures that testing is aligned with actual business processes and requirements.

Option C is correct because it aligns with the purpose of ATDD: to use business models as a foundation for deriving acceptance tests in collaboration with business analysts, testers, and developers.

Other options:

A is incorrect — models are created as part of the project, not necessarily before it starts.

B is incorrect — models support and clarify acceptance criteria; they do not replace them.

D is incorrect — models are maintained as living documentation, especially in agile and iterative approaches.

Answer: C. In an ATDD approach, testers use business process and business rule models to generate acceptance tests.

Traceability is a key principle in requirements and test management. It ensures that all features, requirements, and tests are linked and accounted for. Including traceability to user stories in BPMN diagrams or DMN tables supports transparency, auditability, and maintenance.

Option B is correct because embedding or referencing traceability information within business models improves communication across stakeholders, ensures proper test coverage, and helps during change impact analysis.

Let’s evaluate other options:

Option A is incorrect. Trying to place all model elements in one diagram can lead to cluttered and unreadable models.

Option C is misleading. While separation of concerns is useful, traceability (links to requirements, risks) should be integrated or closely accessible from the models.

Option D is incorrect. Acceptance testers should be involved early to collaborate and review models. Waiting until models are finalized contradicts agile and ATDD principles.

Answer: B. BPMN diagrams and DMN tables should include information such as traceability to user stories.

In business process modeling for testing purposes, especially in acceptance testing, it is not always necessary or practical to model the entire system or process in exhaustive detail. ISTQB and the CTFL-BAT (Business Analysis Testing) extension emphasize that test models — including business process models — should serve specific testing objectives.

Focusing the model on what needs to be tested allows the test team to:

Avoid unnecessary complexity,

Highlight relevant paths and decisions,

Derive precise and efficient test cases,

Facilitate stakeholder understanding and validation.

According to the ISTQB Foundation Level Extension – Business Analysis syllabus:

“Process models used in testing should represent the business behavior relevant to the test scope. Including too many irrelevant paths and decisions can lead to inefficient test case design and may distract from the core validation goals.”

Therefore, Option A is correct because limiting the scope of the business process model to the parts that are relevant for testing is a best practice, especially in acceptance testing where focus is on verifying that business needs are met.

Options B, C, and D are not strong justifications:

B suggests avoiding complexity but not purpose-driven modeling.

C incorrectly implies impossibility rather than pragmatic scope.

Exploratory testing is an unscripted, experience-based testing technique where the tester learns about the system, designs tests, and executes them simultaneously. It is especially effective in Agile environments, where rapid feedback and creative exploration are valuable.

Option D is the least likely action because scripting automated test scripts is a structured activity that typically occurs after exploratory sessions or during more formal test phases. Exploratory testing emphasizes manual exploration, not automation scripting.

Other options:

A is part of the core purpose of exploratory testing — discovering the product.

B is relevant — defining a charter and discussing it with stakeholders (like the Product Owner) helps guide the exploratory session.

C is also relevant — results of exploratory tests should be documented and communicated.

Answer: D. Scripting of the automated test scripts

Acceptance criteria must be concrete, testable, and focused on observable system behavior. They define what the system must do to satisfy a requirement and help determine whether the requirement has been successfully implemented.

REQ 3.28 states: “The automated system records critical credit application data (CCAD) needed to support application screening.” From this, we infer that the system must persistently store this data after data entry.

Option A is the best match because it provides a specific, observable behavior (CCAD being stored in a MySQL database after a successful entry) that can be verified through acceptance testing. It’s a measurable outcome, aligned with the requirement's objective.

Other options are less suitable:

Option B introduces new behavior (displaying a message) not directly tied to the original requirement.

Option C is vague ("quick and reversible") and lacks measurable criteria.

Option D refers to usability guidelines, which is not directly relevant to the storage functionality stated in the requirement.

Exact Reference – ISTQB CTFL Acceptance Testing Syllabus (Section 1.3.2):

“Well-written acceptance criteria are unambiguous, testable, and focused on observable results.”

During defect analysis in the context of acceptance testing, the business analyst plays a key role in mapping test results back to business needs and requirements. If a defect is identified during acceptance testing, the business analyst typically evaluates which requirement, user story, or business rule was not fulfilled. This helps determine whether the issue is critical from a business perspective and what corrective action is required.

Option A is correct because it is the primary responsibility of the business analyst to assess unmet requirements or user stories in the event of a defect.

Other options:

B is typically a developer or architect’s responsibility, as it involves evaluating the technical impact.

C is part of root cause analysis, usually performed by developers or technical leads.

D refers to broader testing scope and could be part of test analysis but is less specific to the business analyst’s role in defect analysis.

Answer: A. Identify the requirements / user stories that are not satisfied.

==================

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation (Approx. 200–220 words):

In the first BPMN diagram (Loan Request Process), the process starts with the receipt of a loan application. Then, parallel gateways (indicated by the “+” symbols) are used to trigger three separate evaluations: verifying employment, requesting and reviewing a credit record, and performing and reviewing a title search. These are executed concurrently, not sequentially.

After all checks are completed, the loan application is reviewed. A decision gateway (diamond with an “X”) checks whether the loan is approved. Depending on the decision:

If approved: a loan approval letter is sent, and a sub-process is triggered (represented by the rectangle with a "+" symbol inside), which is the creation of the loan contract. This is what identifies it as a BPMN “sub-process.”

If rejected: a rejection letter is sent.

In both cases, the process ends after customer notification.

Evaluation of answer options:

A: Incorrect — the verification steps occur before the loan status is determined.

B: Correct — the “Create the loan contract” activity has a “+” symbol, indicating a sub-process.

C: Incorrect — the parallel gateway means these tasks are executed concurrently, not sequentially.

D: Incorrect — all review activities are mandatory prior to application review.

Therefore, B is the correct answer.

Clear, complete, and testable requirements or user stories are critical for effective acceptance testing. Ambiguities or vague statements lead to differing interpretations by stakeholders, developers, and testers. This often results in software that doesn’t meet user expectations or in tests that fail to verify business needs correctly.

Option B is correct because it highlights the importance of precise requirements in both implementation and testing phases. Ambiguities can result in incorrect behavior, untestable features, or test cases that don’t align with business goals.

Other options:

A is risky — while testers may explore assumptions during exploratory testing, relying on assumptions rather than clarification increases risk.

C is incorrect — the INVEST mnemonic helps write better user stories, but it doesn’t replace review or validation processes.

D is false — Agile still values requirements engineering; it’s more collaborative and incremental, with the product owner playing a key role, not diminishing its importance.

Answer: B. Vague or ambiguous requirements may lead to misunderstandings both during implementation and testing

Equivalence Partitioning (EP) is a black-box test design technique that divides input data into valid and invalid partitions, where each partition is expected to exhibit similar behavior. In the context of acceptance testing, EP is especially effective because it helps validate whether a system behaves correctly for representative input ranges defined in the acceptance criteria.

Acceptance testing aims to confirm that the system meets business requirements and handles inputs as expected. EP allows the tester to cover a large input space using fewer test cases while maintaining a high level of effectiveness. It supports efficiency, broad coverage, and relevance to user expectations.

Other options are less suitable:

A. Static code analysis is a white-box technique, more relevant to unit or integration testing.

B. Input validation is an objective or activity, not a test design technique.

D. Defect-based testing is more diagnostic, used after failures or during exploratory testing — less structured for planned acceptance testing.

Exact Reference – ISTQB CTFL Acceptance Testing Syllabus (Section 2.4):

“Black-box techniques such as equivalence partitioning and boundary value analysis are suitable for deriving acceptance tests from user stories or business rules.”

Collaboration between business analysts and testers is essential in defining and reviewing acceptance criteria. When both roles work together, they ensure the criteria are not only aligned with business goals but also testable and clearly specified.

Option A is correct because shared understanding of acceptance criteria allows testers to design test cases that truly validate business expectations, reducing misinterpretations and increasing confidence in the product.

Other options:

B is valid but not the best — non-functional requirements are important but often handled separately.

C is partially correct but assumes acceptance test cases already exist, whereas the review often happens earlier in the process.

D focuses on test reporting, which is downstream from criteria definition and test case design.

Answer: A. A shared vision between the business analyst and the tester on acceptance criteria facilitates the design of acceptance test cases.

Exploratory testing in Agile projects is a structured but unscripted testing approach where learning, test design, and execution occur simultaneously. Timeboxing is a key practice in managing exploratory testing sessions effectively.

A timebox is a fixed duration (e.g., 60–90 minutes) within which testers explore specific functionalities or risks. It encourages focus, documentation of findings, and prevents overrun or testing fatigue. After the session, testers often hold debriefs to review findings and determine next steps.

Option D is correct because timeboxing is essential for exploratory testing management.

Incorrect options:

A. Pair programming relates to development, not testing.

B. Refactoring is a development technique focused on improving code without changing behavior.

C. Planning poker is used in Agile for effort estimation, not directly related to exploratory testing.

Exact Reference – ISTQB CTFL Acceptance Testing Syllabus (Section 3.1):

“Exploratory testing is often conducted in time-boxed sessions, with a charter guiding the scope of the session.”

Comprehensive Detailed Explanation:

According to the scenario described in the question, the business process for expense reimbursement includes two key timing constraints:

If the request is not processed within 7 days, an "ongoing" email is sent to the employee.

If the request is not completed within 30 days, the process is canceled and the employee is asked to resubmit the request.

However, in the BPMN model presented in the image, the second timing event (clock icon near "Approval in Progress") incorrectly shows 23 days instead of 30 days. This discrepancy misrepresents the actual business rule and violates the accuracy required in process modeling.

ISTQB Foundation Level Extension – Acceptance Testing syllabus and the Certified Tester Foundation Level Business Process Testing (CTFL-BAT) emphasize that a process model should correctly reflect the specified behavior, rules, and constraints of the business scenario. An incorrect timer can lead to miscommunication between stakeholders and incorrect automation or implementation logic.

Therefore, Option A is the most likely review comment since it directly points to this inconsistency in the model.