Which testing principle provides a good reason to base testing upon risk mitigation priorities?

Question

Options

• ATesting shows the presence of defects
• BExhaustive testing is impossible
• CTests wear out
• DDefects tend to cluster in a few modules

• A
  4% (1)
• B
  89% (25)
• C
  7% (2)

Explanation

Exhaustive testing is impossible (B) is correct because you can never test every input, path, or combination - so you must prioritize what to test. Risk-based testing directly addresses this constraint by focusing limited testing effort where failure would have the greatest impact, making it the most rational response to the impossibility of testing everything.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (Testing shows presence of defects): This principle explains what testing can prove (defects exist, not their absence) - it's about test limitations, not prioritization strategy.
• C (Tests wear out): This refers to test effectiveness degrading over time as software adapts to known tests (pesticide paradox) - unrelated to why we prioritize by risk.
• D (Defects cluster in modules): This is the Pareto/defect clustering principle - it describes where defects tend to be found, not the fundamental reason why we must prioritize testing at all.

Memory tip: Think of B as the root cause of risk-based testing - because you can't test everything, you must decide what matters most. The other options describe real principles but answer different "why/where/what" questions, not the one about prioritization necessity.

No community discussion yet for this question.