ISTQB-CTFL ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Questions and Answers

• 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:

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

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】.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

Independent testing offers several advantages, such as unbiased testing and detection of different defects. However, a drawback is that an independent test team may be isolated from the development team and project team. This can lead to communication gaps, reduced collaboration, and a lack of understanding of the project context.

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) syllabus v4.0, an independent test team may not have the same level of understanding of the system as the development team, leading to potential issues in communication and integration​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

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.

In defect reporting, the attribute that indicates the degree of impact that the defect has on the system is the severity. Severity reflects the seriousness of the defect in terms of its impact on the operation of the system, ranging from minor issues that do not significantly affect the system's functionality to critical defects that can cause system failure. Therefore, option B is the correct answer​​.

Static analysis tools are software tools that examine the source code of a program without executing it. They can detect various types of issues, such as syntax errors, coding standards violations, security vulnerabilities, and potential bugs12. However, static analysis tools cannot identify issues that depend on the runtime behavior or performance of the program, such as very low MTBF (Mean Time Between failure)3. MTBF is a measure of the reliability of a system or component. It is calculated by dividing the total operating time by the number of failures. MTBF reflects how often a system or component fails during its expected lifetime. Static analysis tools cannot measure MTBF because they do not run the program or observe its failures. MTBF can only be estimated by dynamic testing, which involves executing the program under various conditions and collecting data on its failures4. Therefore, very low MTBF is an issue that cannot be identified by static analysis tools. The other options, such as potentially endless loops, referencing a variable with an undefined value, and security vulnerabilities, are issues that can be identified by static analysis tools. Static analysis tools can detect potentially endless loops by analyzing the control flow and data flow of the program and checking for conditions that may never become false5. Static analysis tools can detect referencing a variable with an undefined value by checking the scope and initialization of variables and reporting any use of uninitialized variables6. Static analysis tools can detect security vulnerabilities by checking for common patterns of insecure code, such as buffer overflows, SQL injections, cross-site scripting, and weak encryption. References = What Is Static Analysis? Static Code Analysis Tools - Perforce Software, How Static Code Analysis Works | Perforce, Static Code Analysis: Techniques, Top 5 Benefits & 3 Challenges, What is MTBF? Mean Time Between Failures Explained | Perforce, Static analysis tools - Software Testing MCQs - CareerRide, ISTQB_Chapter3 | Quizizz, [Static Code Analysis for Security Vulnerabilities | Perforce].

Branch coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of branches or decision outcomes that are executed by the test cases. A branch is a point in the code where the control flow can take two or more alternative paths based on a condition. For example, an if-else statement is a branch that can execute either the if-block or the else-block depending on the evaluation of the condition. Branch coverage ensures that each branch is taken at least once by the test cases, and thus reveals the behavior of the software under different scenarios. Branch coverage is also known as decision coverage or all-edges coverage.

Branch coverage is suitable for testing the cases where a specific action is not allowed, because it can verify that the test cases cover all the possible outcomes of the conditions that determine the action. For example, if the program has a condition that checks if the manufacturing stage can be stopped, then branch coverage can ensure that the test cases cover both the cases where the stage can be stopped and where it cannot be stopped. This way, branch coverage can help identify any missing or incorrect branches that may lead to undesired or unsafe actions.

The other options are not correct because they are not suitable for testing the cases where a specific action is not allowed. Code coverage is a general term that encompasses various types of coverage metrics, such as statement coverage, branch coverage, data flow coverage, etc. Code coverage does not specify which type of coverage metric is used for the analysis. Data flow coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of data flow paths that are executed by the test cases. A data flow path is a sequence of statements that define, use, or kill a variable. Data flow coverage is useful for testing the correctness and completeness of the data manipulation in the software, but not for testing the conditions that determine the actions. Statement coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of statements or lines of code that are executed by the test cases. Statement coverage ensures that each statement is executed at least once by the test cases, but it does not reveal the behavior of the software under different scenarios. Statement coverage is a weaker criterion than branch coverage, because it does not account for the branches or decision outcomes in the code. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 4: Test Techniques, Section 4.3: Structural Testing Techniques, Pages 51-54.

The test leader is the person who is responsible for planning, monitoring, and controlling the test activities and resources in a test project. The test leader should have the best knowledge of the test objectives, scope, risks, resources, schedule, and quality criteria. The test leader should also be aware of the test automation criteria, such as the execution frequency, the test support, the team education, the roles and responsibilities, and the devs and testers collaboration1. Based on these factors, the test leader can decide which tests are suitable for automation and which are not, and prioritize them accordingly. The test leader can also coordinate with the test automation engineers, the developers, and the stakeholders to ensure the alignment of the test automation strategy with the test project goals and expectations. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.1, Page 152; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Page 403; ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 6, Section 6.1.1, Page 514; Top 8 Test Automation Criteria You Need To Fulfill - QAMIND1

An incident report during testing should focus on factual observations of failures or defects in the system, including their impacts and how they deviate from expected results. Options A, C, and D describe specific issues that are directly related to the system's behavior or performance and are suitable for inclusion in an incident report. Option B, which describes the user interface as "complicated and confusing" and relates to the tester's personal difficulty in following the test script, is more subjective and relates to the tester's experience rather than an objective observation of a system failure. Therefore, option B is the least appropriate for an incident report​​.

• The question is about marking the correct sentences among the given statements related to defects, failures, and mistakes. According to the ISTQB glossary, the definitions of these terms are1:
• Therefore, out of the five given statements, only two are correct, namely:
• The other three statements are incorrect, namely:

References:

• 1: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms 4.0, 2023, available at ISTQB) and ASTQB).

Static testing refers to testing that doesn't involve executing code. It includes activities like reviews, inspections, and static analysis. Tools that support static testing help with activities such as analyzing source code, checking coding standards, and aiding in document reviews. These tools can automate or facilitate various aspects of static testing processes, such as highlighting potential issues in code or documents without executing the software.References:

• ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 6.1.1.

The absence-of-errors fallacy, as explained in the ISTQB syllabus, is the erroneous belief that having fewer defects found in testing equates to a system being more successful upon release. This misconception can lead stakeholders to undervalue thorough testing. Answer C illustrates this fallacy perfectly: assuming that because few defects were found, the system will be successful, neglects the many other factors that contribute to system success, including user satisfaction and fit-for-purpose.References:ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 1.1.5 "Absence-of-errors fallacy".

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

The additional test cases are:

• DT1: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Insufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = True)
• DT2: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = False, Correct PIN = True)
• DT3: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Insufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = False)
• DT4: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = False, Correct PIN = False)

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.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• 10 Sample Exams ISTQB Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0

 If a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, then it is guaranteed that every executable statement is covered. Decision coverage (also known as branch coverage) is a type of structural coverage (also known as white-box coverage) that measures how many decision outcomes have been exercised by a test suite. A decision outcome is a possible result of a decision point (such as an if-then-else statement) in a program’s code. Decision coverage requires that each decision point has both true and false outcomes executed at least once by a test suite. Decision coverage implies statement coverage, which is another type of structural coverage that measures how many executable statements have been executed by a test suite. Statement coverage requires that each executable statement is executed at least once by a test suite. Therefore, if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, then it also got 100% statement coverage in a test, which means that every executable statement is covered. The other options are not guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test. Every output equivalence class has been tested and every input equivalence class has been tested are not guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, because equivalence classes are based on functional requirements or specifications, not on code structure or logic. Equivalence classes are used in specification-based testing (also known as black-box testing), which is a type of testing that does not consider the internal structure or implementation of the system under test. Decision coverage is used in structure-based testing (also known as white-box testing), which is a type of testing that considers the internal structure or implementation of the system under test. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not imply achieving 100% equivalence class coverage. The “dead” code has not been covered is not guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, because dead code (also known as unreachable code) is code that can never be executed due to logical errors or design flaws. Dead code can reduce readability and maintainability of the code, as well as increase complexity and size. Decision coverage does not account for dead code, as it only considers the decision outcomes that are possible to execute. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not imply that the dead code has not been covered. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 36.

According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, a defect is a deviation from the expected result which in this scenario is the incorrect discount applied to the customers. The root cause, as per the ISTQB definition, is the originating cause of a defect, which in this case is the incorrect requirement stating 50% instead of 5%. Therefore, the incorrect requirement is the root cause and the customer receiving the wrong discount is the effect of this root cause.References:ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 1.4.3 "Defects, Root Causes, and Effects".

There are two main approaches to test estimation:

• Expert-based approach:
• Metrics-based approach:

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, the expert-based approach relies on experts' experience and knowledge, which aligns with the Wideband Delphi technique【6†source】.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

When a manager asks when testing will be complete, the most appropriate and informative resource to provide an answer is test progress reports (Option A). Test progress reports contain detailed information on the status of testing activities, including what has been accomplished, what remains to be done, the results of the tests conducted, and any issues or risks that might impact the completion of testing. These reports allow for an informed assessment of the testing progress and estimation of when testing might be completed. Options B, C, and D do not provide the structured, detailed, and specific information required to accurately answer the manager's question about the completion of testing.

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.

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.

Non-functional testing refers to testing aspects that do not relate to specific behaviors or functions of the software but to attributes such as performance, usability, reliability, etc. Tests that capture the time it takes to save a file directly relate to the performance of the system, thus falling under non-functional testing.References:ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 1.2.5 "Functional and Non-functional Testing".

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.

A test case is a set of input values, execution preconditions, expected results and execution postconditions, developed for a particular objective or test condition. A test case is a sequence of actions for test execution that can be followed by a tester or a test automation tool. A test case is specified during the test implementation activity, which is the activity that prepares the testware needed for test execution. A test case does not include actual results, as these are obtained during test execution and compared with the expected results. A test case does not describe items or events to test, as these are derived from the test basis during the test analysis activity. A test case is not derived during the test design activity, as this is the activity that specifies the test conditions or objectives that need to be tested. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 23-24; Chapter 4, page 34.

Considering the various valid input equivalence partitions of hours studied and intensity, three additional test cases are needed to fully cover all valid partitions. This would typically include testing combinations that vary both the number of hours and the intensity levels not covered by the initial test cases​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.References:

• ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 PDF

The most important report improvement for the given incident report would be to add information about which web browser was used when the defect was detected. This information is relevant for reproducing and debugging the defect, as different web browsers may have different behaviors or compatibility issues with the web application. The other options are less important or irrelevant for the incident report. The developer who should fix the bug can be assigned by the project manager or the defect tracking system, not by the tester who reports the defect. The time stamp when the incident happened is not very useful, as it does not indicate the cause or the frequency of the defect. The impact analysis is not part of the incident report, but rather of the risk assessment or prioritization process. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 140.

A static analysis tool is a tool that analyzes a given program’s source code or executable code without executing it. A static analysis tool can perform various types of analysis on a program’s code, such as syntax checking, data flow analysis, control flow analysis, complexity measurement, coding standards compliance checking, etc. Control flow analysis is a type of analysis that examines how a program’s statements are executed in different paths or branches. One of the most likely outcomes of control flow analysis is identification of unreachable code, which is code that can never be executed due to logical errors or design flaws. Unreachable code can reduce readability and maintainability of the code, as well as increase complexity and size. The other options are not outcomes of control flow analysis, but rather outcomes of other types of analysis. Report on adherence to coding standards is an outcome of coding standards compliance checking. Number of comment lines and number of source code lines are outcomes of complexity measurement. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 8.

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 only two boundary values (14 and 351), option C has only two boundary values (15 and 350), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

Equivalence partitioning is a black-box test design technique where inputs to the software or system are divided into groups that are expected to exhibit similar behavior. For an integer field that should accept values from 1 to 15, the valid equivalence class is 1 through 15. The invalid equivalence classes are numbers less than 1 and numbers more than 15. Therefore, option D, "Less than 1, 1 through 15, more than 15," correctly identifies the valid equivalence class along with the two invalid classes, covering all possible input scenarios for the field. Options A, B, and C either do not accurately capture the valid range or incorrectly specify the range boundaries.

You should choose a test technique because you need to match the way you test to the content of the product under test. A test technique is a method or process for deriving and selecting test cases based on some criteria or rules. Different test techniques are suitable for different types of software products, depending on their characteristics, functionalities, requirements, specifications, risks, etc. Choosing a test technique helps to ensure that the test cases are relevant, effective, and efficient for the product under test. The other options are not correct reasons to choose a test technique. Time constraints are not a factor for choosing a test technique, but rather for prioritizing or optimizing testing activities. Covering the full scope of the product’s functionality is not a guarantee of choosing a test technique, but rather a goal of testing. Choosing a test technique is not a common practice in software testing, but rather a professional skill and responsibility. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 31.

• Looking for defects in a system does not require ignoring system details, but rather paying attention to them and understanding how they affect the system’s quality, functionality, and usability. Ignoring system details could lead to missing important defects or testing irrelevant aspects of the system.
• Identifying defects may be perceived as criticism against product, especially by the developers or stakeholders who are invested in the product’s success. However, identifying defects is not meant to be a personal attack, but rather a constructive feedback that helps to improve the product and ensure its alignment with the requirements and expectations of the users and clients.
• Looking for defects in system requires professional pessimism and curiosity, as testers need to anticipate and explore the possible ways that the system could fail, malfunction, or behave unexpectedly. Professional pessimism means being skeptical and critical of the system’s quality and reliability, while curiosity means being eager and interested in finding out the root causes and consequences of the defects.
• Testing is often seen as a destructive activity instead of constructive activity, as it involves finding and reporting the flaws and weaknesses of the system, rather than creating or enhancing it. However, testing is actually a constructive activity, as it contributes to the system’s improvement, verification, validation, and optimization, and ultimately to the delivery of a high-quality product that meets the needs and expectations of the users and clients.

 State testing techniques are a type of dynamic testing techniques that are based on the behavior of the system under test for different input conditions and events. Dynamic testing techniques require the system to be executed with test cases, whereas static testing techniques do not. Static testing techniques can be applied before the code is ready for execution, such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, and static analysis. Static testing techniques can help find defects early in the development process, improve the quality of the code, and reduce the cost and effort of dynamic testing. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 281; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Page 292

A failure is an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits. A failure is observable by the software users or other stakeholders. A failure is caused by one or more defects in the software. In this case, the software not being able to meet the desired response time is an example of a failure, as it deviates from the stated requirement and affects the user experience. It is not a defect, which is a flaw in the software that causes the failure. It is not an error, which is a human action that produces an incorrect result. It is not a non-defect, as it clearly violates a specified requirement. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 1, page 4.

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.

A valid criticism of this report is that the version of the application is missing. The version of the application is an important piece of information that should be included in a defect report, as it helps to identify which release or build of the software product contains the defect. The version of the application can also help to reproduce and debug the defect, as different versions may have different behaviors or features. The other options are not valid criticisms of this report. The priority, the correction description and the developer name are not missing, but rather not applicable for this report. The priority is a measure of how urgently a defect needs to be fixed, which can be assigned by the project manager or the defect tracking system, not by the tester who reports the defect. The correction description and the developer name are information that are added after the defect has been resolved, not when it has been reported. There is no link to the applicable requirement (traceability) is not a valid criticism of this report, because traceability is not a mandatory attribute of a defect report, but rather an optional one. Traceability is a relationship between two or more entities (such as requirements, test cases, defects, etc.) that shows how they are related or dependent on each other. Traceability can help to verify that the requirements are met by the test cases and defects, but it is not essential for reporting a defect. The description is not highlighting the source of the problem is not a valid criticism of this report, because highlighting the source of the problem is not a responsibility of the tester who reports the defect, but rather of the developer who fixes the defect. The description should provide enough information to describe what happened when the defect occurred, such as input values, expected results, actual results, error messages, screenshots, etc., but it does not need to explain why or how it happened. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 140.

To achieve 100% statement coverage, we need to design test cases that ensure every statement in the given pseudo-code is executed at least once. Analyzing the pseudo-code, we notice that there are conditions based on two variables: Gender and Age. To cover all statements, we need to consider the paths that lead to each assignment of the Shoe Size variable.

• Gender = Boy, Age <= 3 (Shoe Size assignment is not reached, but the condition is evaluated)
• Gender = Boy, Age > 3 AND Age < 5 (Shoe Size = 1)
• Gender = Boy, Age >= 5 AND Age < 7 (Shoe Size = 2)
• Gender != Boy, Age <= 3 (Again, Shoe Size assignment is not reached, but the condition is evaluated)
• Gender != Boy, Age > 3 AND Age < 5 (Shoe Size = 0)
• Gender != Boy, Age >= 5 AND Age < 7 (Shoe Size = 1)

However, upon closer inspection, we see that tests 1 and 4 do not contribute to statement coverage as they do not lead to a Shoe Size assignment. Therefore, we only need 4 test cases to achieve 100% statement coverage, making option B the correct answer.

State transition testing is a black-box testing technique used to analyze the behavior of a system by examining the transitions between different states in response to events. In state transition testing, a state table or diagram is used to represent the states of a system and the transitions between these states triggered by events.

Option D is correct because in state transition testing, all transitions between states should be explicitly shown in the state table. This includes valid transitions that the system is expected to make under normal operation and, where relevant, invalid transitions that should be tested to ensure the system handles unexpected or erroneous inputs gracefully. The state table provides a comprehensive view of how the system should behave, making it possible to create tests that cover all defined transitions.

Matching the descriptions with the test techniques:

• Black-box test techniques use the external description of the software, including requirements, use cases, and user stories.
• White-box test techniques use the internal structure of the software system, including software architecture and code.
• Black-box test techniques can reveal deviations from the requirements as they validate the external behavior of the software.
• Both black-box and white-box test techniques are applicable to functional and non-functional testing.
• Experience-based test techniques rely on the knowledge and intuition of developers, users, and other stakeholders​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.References:

• ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 PDF

The correct answer can be derived by applying the given rules to each case:

• A is ST certified and has 12 years of testing experience, which is more than 10 years. Therefore, A does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown.
• B is not ST certified and has 7 years of testing experience, which is between 5 and 10 years. Therefore, B matches rule 3 and the result is limited access.
• C is not ST certified and has 3 years of testing experience, which is less than 5 years. Therefore, C does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown. Verified References: This question does not require any external references, as it is based on logical reasoning.

A key characteristic of informal reviews is low cost. Informal reviews are a type of review that does not follow a formal process or have any formal documentation. Informal reviews are usually performed by individuals or small groups of peers or colleagues who have some knowledge or interest in the product under review. Informal reviews can be done at any time and for any purpose, such as checking for errors, clarifying doubts, sharing ideas, etc. Informal reviews have low cost, as they do not require much time, effort, or resources to conduct. The other options are not key characteristics of informal reviews. Kick-off meeting is a characteristic of formal reviews, such as inspections or walkthroughs. Kick-off meeting is a meeting that is held before the review process starts, where the roles and responsibilities of the participants are defined, the objectives and scope of the review are agreed, and the logistics and schedule of the review are planned. Individual preparation is a characteristic of formal reviews, such as inspections or walkthroughs. Individual preparation is an activity that is performed by the reviewers before the review meeting, where they examine the product under review and identify any issues or questions that need to be discussed or resolved during the review meeting. Metrics analysis is a characteristic of formal reviews, such as inspections or walkthroughs. Metrics analysis is an activity that is performed after the review process is completed, where the data and results of the review are collected and analyzed to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the review, as well as to identify any improvement actions or lessons learned for future reviews. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 9.

Option D correctly explains what is represented by the lines A, B and the axes X, Y in a testing metrics chart. According to option D:

• X-axis represents Time
• Y-axis represents Count
• Line A represents Number of open bugs
• Line B represents Total number of executed tests

This information is essential in understanding and analyzing the testing metrics of a completed project.

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Section 2.5.1, Page 35.

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.

An incident is any event that occurs during testing that requires investigation. An incident report is a document that records the details of an incident. The next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation is to try to recreate the incident before reporting. This can help confirm that the incident is reproducible and not caused by a random or external factor. This can also help gather more information about the incident, such as the steps to reproduce it, the expected and actual results, the severity and priority of the incident, or any screenshots or logs that can illustrate the incident. Trying to identify the code fragment causing the problem is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this is a debugging activity that is usually performed by developers after receiving the incident report. Sending an email to the developer and not reporting the bug is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this is an informal and unstructured way of communicating incidents that can lead to confusion, inconsistency or loss of information. Reporting the incident as is without any further action is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this can result in incomplete or inaccurate incident reports that can hamper the investigation and resolution of incidents. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33.

• The testing of software does not demonstrate the absence of defects, but rather the presence of defects or the conformance of the software to the specified requirements1. Testing can never prove that the software is defect-free, as it is impossible to test all possible scenarios, inputs, outputs, and behaviors of the software2. Testing can only provide a level of confidence in the quality of the software, based on the coverage, effectiveness, and efficiency of the testing activities3.
• The other options are correct because:

References =

• 1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 10
• 2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 11
• 3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 12
• 4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 13
• 5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 97
• 6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 98
• 7 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 14
• [8] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 15
• [9] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 16
• [10] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 17
• [11] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 18
• [12] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 19

For executive-level employees, a test summary report should be concise and focus on high-level information. It typically includes a summary of defects categorized by priority or budget. Executives are generally interested in the overall status and the impact on critical business objectives rather than detailed technical information. The report should provide an overview of the most important aspects of testing, such as key issues, test progress, and any risks or concerns that could affect project outcomes.References:

• ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 5.3.1.

Entry and exit criteria are used to determine when to start and stop testing, respectively.

• Entry Criteria:
• Exit Criteria:

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, these criteria help in effectively managing the testing process【6†source】.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

Test automation provides numerous benefits to software testing, and one of the key advantages is the reduction of repetitive manual work. This benefit is explicitly covered in the ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus (v4.0).

Test automation allows testers to automate repetitive tasks such as regression testing, freeing up their time to focus on more complex and exploratory testing. This leads to improved efficiency and helps in avoiding human errors associated with repetitive tasks.

Option A: "More subjective assessment" contradicts the benefit of automation as it focuses on objectivity.

Option C: "Availability of the test automation tool vendor" is not a direct benefit of test automation, although vendor support can be valuable.

Option D: "Negligible effort to maintain the test assets" is misleading as maintaining automated tests often requires effort and attention to changes in the system under test.

Therefore, the correct answer is B​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (ISTQB)​.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

Component integration tests are designed to verify the interactions and interfaces between integrated components. These tests should be carried out after component testing (where individual components are tested in isolation) but before system testing (where the entire system is tested as a whole). This ensures that any issues arising from the integration of components are identified and resolved early in the testing process, making option D the correct answer​​.

Independent testing is testing performed by a person or group that is independent of the development team. Independent testing can have various degrees of independence, ranging from testers who are part of the same organization as developers to testers who are external contractors or consultants. Independent testing can have various benefits, such as reducing bias, increasing objectivity, improving quality, or providing different perspectives. Independent testing is not necessary because developers don’t know any testing, as this is a wrong and disrespectful statement. Developers can perform various types of testing, such as unit testing, component testing, or integration testing. However, independent testing can complement developer testing by providing additional levels of verification and validation, such as system testing, acceptance testing, or non-functional testing. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 16-17.

Defect clustering is a testing principle that states that a small number of modules contain most of the defects detected during pre-release testing, or are responsible for most of the operational failures. Defect clustering can be explained by Pareto’s principle (also known as the 80-20 rule), which states that approximately 80% of the problems are found in 20% of the modules. Defect clustering suggests a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, as it implies that more effort should be allocated to test the modules that have shown high defect density or criticality. Pesticide paradox is another testing principle that states that if the same tests are repeated over and over again, eventually they will no longer find any new defects. Pesticide paradox suggests a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but not based on defect clustering, but rather on test diversity and coverage. Early testing is a testing principle that states that testing activities should start as early as possible in the software development life cycle and should be focused on defined objectives. Early testing does not suggest a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but rather a proactive approach to prevent defects from occurring or propagating. Absence-of-errors fallacy is a testing principle that states that finding and fixing defects does not help if the system built is unusable and does not fulfill the users’ needs and expectations. Absence-of-errors fallacy does not suggest a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but rather a focus on quality attributes and user requirements. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 1, page 9-10.