Exam Dumps VCE

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.

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 applied to both input and output values. Based on the given requirement, we can identify two input values: age and weekend. Age should be an integer of 0 or above, and weekend means Friday to Sunday inclusive. The following statement is not correct:
A) Thursday is a valid input boundary value. This statement is not correct, as Thursday is not a boundary value for the input weekend. The boundary values for the input weekend are Friday and Sunday, as they are at the edge of the equivalence partition that represents weekend days. The following statements are correct:
B) A minimum of 6 valid test cases are derived from boundary value analysis based on input age. This statement is correct, as we can derive six valid test cases based on input age by using the minimum and maximum values for each equivalence partition defined by the requirement. The equivalence partitions for input age are: under 7 (0 to 6), 7 to 13 inclusive (7 to 13), and greater than 65 (66 and above). The minimum and maximum values for each partition are: 0 and 6, 7 and 13, and 66 and any value above it.
C) $3.01 is a valid output boundary value. This statement is correct, as $3.01 is a boundary value for the output additional fee. The additional fee can have four possible values depending on the input age: $0 (for visitors aged under 7), $2.40 (for visitors aged 7 to 13 inclusive with a 20% discount), $1.50 (for visitors aged greater than 65 with a 50% discount), and $3 (for visitors aged between 14 and 65). The boundary values for the output additional fee are $0 and $3, as they are at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Therefore, $3.01 is a valid output boundary value, as it is at the smallest incremental distance above $3.
D) 7 and 13 are boundary values for the equivalence partition including age 10. This statement is correct, as 7 and 13 are boundary values for the equivalence partition that represents visitors aged 7 to 13 inclusive. This partition includes age 10, which is an internal value within the partition. Verified Reference: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus – Springer], Chapter 4, page 37-38.

According to the ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, page 18, a failure is “an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits”. In this case, the calculator software does not perform the required function of calculating the correct result for 5+6 within the specified limits of accuracy and precision. Therefore, this is an example of a failure.
The other options are incorrect because:
A mistake is “a human action that produces an incorrect result” (page 25). A mistake is not an event, but an action, and it may or may not lead to a failure. For example, a mistake could be a typo in the code, a wrong assumption in the design, or a misunderstanding of the requirement.
A fault is “a defect in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function” (page 16). A fault is not an event, but a defect, and it may or may not cause a failure. For example, a fault could be a logical error in the code, a missing specification in the design, or a contradiction in the requirement.
An error is “the difference between a computed, observed, or measured value or condition and the true, specified, or theoretically correct value or condition” (page 15). An error is not an event, but a difference, and it may or may not result in a failure. For example, an error could be a rounding error in the calculation, a measurement error in the observation, or a deviation error in the condition.
Reference = ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 15-18, 25; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 – Sample Exam – Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 96, page 34.

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 Reference: A Study Guide to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus – Springer, page 8.

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 Reference: A Study Guide to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus – Springer, page 9.

According to the ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, page 18, a failure is “an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits”. In this case, the calculator software does not perform the required function of calculating the correct result for 5+6 within the specified limits of accuracy and precision. Therefore, this is an example of a failure.
The other options are incorrect because:
* A mistake is “a human action that produces an incorrect result” (page 25). A mistake is not an event, but an action, and it may or may not lead to a failure. For example, a mistake could be a typo in the code, a wrong assumption in the design, or a misunderstanding of the requirement.
* A fault is “a defect in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function” (page 16). A fault is not an event, but a defect, and it may or may not cause a failure. For example, a fault could be a logical error in the code, a missing specification in the design, or a contradiction in the requirement.
* An error is “the difference between a computed, observed, or measured value or condition and the true, specified, or theoretically correct value or condition” (page 15). An error is not an event, but a difference, and it may or may not result in a failure. For example, an error could be a rounding error in the calculation, a measurement error in the observation, or a deviation error in the condition.
References = ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 15-18, 25; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 – Sample Exam – Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 96, page 34.

The IEEE 829 standard is a widely used specification for test documentation, but it is not mandatory or universal. Most test documentation regimes follow this spec to some degree, with changes done to fit a specific situation or organization. The standard does not require any approval from management, marketing or development for any deviation, nor does it depend on the type of project (military or consumer market). The standard also does not guarantee high quality test documentation regimes, as it only provides a general outline and format, not the actual content or quality criteria. Verified Reference: A Study Guide to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus – Springer, page 16.

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 Reference: A Study Guide to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus – Springer, page 9.

Selecting the right test technique is crucial because different techniques are suited to different types of testing and can significantly increase the effectiveness of the testing process by creating tests that are more likely to find defects. While reducing the number of tests (A) and defining the number of regression cycles (D) are considerations in the testing process, they are not the primary reasons for selecting a test technique. The assertion that the only way to test a software application is by using well-proven test techniques (B) is too restrictive and does not acknowledge the adaptability required in testing to suit different contexts and objectives. Therefore, option C is the most comprehensive reason, as it focuses on the effectiveness and efficiency of testing, leading to the creation of high-quality tests that have a higher chance of finding bugs.

* 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.

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.References:
* ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 1.4.2.

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.
Reference:
1: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 10
2: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 11
3: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 12
4: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 13
5: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 13
6: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 77
7: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 78
8: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 79
9: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 80
10: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 81
11: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 82
12: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 83
13: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 84
14: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 85
15: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 86
16: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 87
17: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 88
18: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 89
19: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 90
20: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 91
21: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 92
22: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 93
23: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 94
24: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 95
25: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 96
26: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 97
27: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 98
28: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 99
29: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 100
30: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 101
31: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 102
32: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 103
33: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 104
34: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 105
35: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 106
36: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 107

Equivalence partitioning and boundary value analysis are test design techniques that are most appropriate for testing the login page of a web site. The page contains fields for user name and password, which are input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. Equivalence 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 partitioning can be used to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. 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 detect defects caused by incorrect handling of boundary conditions. For example, for testing the user name field, we can identify two equivalence partitions: valid user name (existing and correct) and invalid user name (non-existing or incorrect). The boundary values for these partitions are the minimum and maximum length of user name allowed by the system.
Decision table testing and state transition testing are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions or events. Decision table testing is a technique that shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). State transition testing is a technique that models how a system transitions from one state to another depending on events or conditions.
Exploratory testing and statement coverage are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that require learning, creativity and intuition or structural analysis. 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. Statement coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many statements in a program have been executed by a test suite. Statement coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite.
Decision coverage and fault attack are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that have complex logic or potential errors. Decision coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many decision outcomes in a program have been executed by a test suite. Decision coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite. Fault attack is a type of functional testing that deliberately introduces faults into a system in order to provoke failures or errors. Verified Reference: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus – Springer], Chapter 4, page 34-46; Chapter 5, page 47-48.

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.

When scheduling test cases, priorities and dependencies must be considered. The best execution order will respect both the logical dependencies and the priorities assigned to each test case.
Given the options, the correct order considering the priorities and dependencies is:
* TC1 (Priority 1)
* **TC (ISTQB not-for-profit association)ity 2, dependent on TC1)
* TC2 (Priority 3, dependent on TC1)
* TC4 (Priority 4)
* TC5 (Priority 5)
* TC6 (Priority 6, dependent on TC4)
According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, understanding dependencies and scheduling tests accordingly is crucial for effective test execution6†source.
References:
* Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
* ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

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. Reference = 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

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 Reference: 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 management tool is a software tool that supports recording and tracking incidents throughout their life cycle. A QA manager of a start-up company needs to implement within a week a low cost incident management tool. The best option for this case is to manage the incidents in a spreadsheet posted on the intranet. This option has several advantages over other options:
It is low cost, as it does not require purchasing any additional software or hardware.
It is easy to implement within a week, as it does not require installing or configuring any complex software or hardware.
It is accessible and transparent, as it can be viewed and updated by anyone who has access to the intranet.
It is structured and organized, as it can store and display various information about incidents, such as identifier, summary, description, severity, priority, status, resolution, etc. The other options are not suitable for this case, as they have several disadvantages over the chosen option:
Documenting incidents on a large board in the lab is not a good option, as it is not accessible or transparent to anyone who is not physically present in the lab. It is also not structured or organized, as it may not store or display all the necessary information about incidents.
Purchasing and deploying an incident management tool is not a good option, as it is not low cost or easy to implement within a week. It may require spending a significant amount of money and time on acquiring, installing and configuring the software or hardware.
Managing the incidents through emails and phone calls is not a good option, as it is not structured or organized. It may lead to confusion, inconsistency or loss of information about incidents. Verified Reference: A Study Guide to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus – Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33.

The V-model is a software development life cycle model that defines four test levels that correspond to four development phases: component (unit) testing with component design, integration testing with architectural design, system testing with system requirements, and acceptance testing with user requirements. The V-model emphasizes the importance of verifying and validating each phase of development with a corresponding level of testing, and ensuring that the test objectives, test basis, and test artifacts are aligned and consistent across the test levels. Therefore, an organization that wants to follow the V-model cannot do away with integration testing, as it would break the symmetry and completeness of the V-model, and compromise the quality and reliability of the software or system under test. Integration testing is a test level that aims to test the interactions and interfaces between components or subsystems, and to detect any defects or inconsistencies that may arise from the integration of different parts of the software or system. Integration testing is essential for ensuring the functionality, performance, and compatibility of the software or system as a whole, and for identifying and resolving any integration issues early in the development process. Skipping integration testing would increase the risk of finding serious defects later in the test process, or worse, in the production environment, which would be more costly and difficult to fix, and could damage the reputation and credibility of the organization. Therefore, the correct answer is D.
The other options are incorrect because:
A) It is not allowed as organizations can decide on the test levels to do depending on the context of the system under test. While it is true that the choice and scope of test levels may vary depending on the context of the system under test, such as the size, complexity, criticality, and risk level of the system, the organization cannot simply ignore or skip a test level that is defined and required by the chosen software development life cycle model. The organization must follow the principles and guidelines of the software development life cycle model, and ensure that the test levels are consistent and coherent with the development phases. If the organization wants to have more flexibility and adaptability in choosing the test levels, it should consider using a different software development life cycle model, such as an agile or iterative model, that allows for more dynamic and incremental testing approaches.
B) It is not allowed because integration testing is not an important test level and can be dispensed with. This statement is false and misleading, as integration testing is a very important test level that cannot be dispensed with. Integration testing is vital for testing the interactions and interfaces between components or subsystems, and for ensuring the functionality, performance, and compatibility of the software or system as a whole. Integration testing can reveal defects or inconsistencies that may not be detected by component (unit) testing alone, such as interface errors, data flow errors, integration logic errors, or performance degradation. Integration testing can also help to verify and validate the architectural design and the integration strategy of the software or system, and to ensure that the software or system meets the specified and expected quality attributes, such as reliability, usability, security, and maintainability. Integration testing can also provide feedback and confidence to the developers and stakeholders about the progress and quality of the software or system development. Therefore, integration testing is a crucial and indispensable test level that should not be skipped or omitted.
C) It is not allowed because integration testing is a very important test level and ignoring it means definite poor product quality. This statement is partially true, as integration testing is a very important test level that should not be ignored, and skipping it could result in poor product quality. However, this statement is too strong and absolute, as it implies that integration testing is the only factor that determines the product quality, and that ignoring it would guarantee a poor product quality. This is not necessarily the case, as there may be other factors that affect the product quality, such as the quality of the requirements, design, code, and other test levels, the effectiveness and efficiency of the test techniques and tools, the competence and experience of the developers and testers, the availability and adequacy of the resources and environment, the management and communication of the project, and the expectations and satisfaction of the customers and users. Therefore, while integration testing is a very important test level that should not be skipped, it is not the only test level that matters, and skipping it does not necessarily mean definite poor product quality, but rather a higher risk and likelihood of poor product quality.
Reference = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.3, pages 16-18; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 38-39; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 – Sample Exam – Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 104, page 36.