Manual Software testing techniques are almost the same as they were a couple of decades ago. It helps in checking the business functionality of a software’s process, in the same manner, as a business person is going to use it. Since the QA and testing are manual, there are vast possibilities of error, and processes take a great deal of time. On the other hand, automation techniques are more precise and quick. Still, they are not as reliable as human intuition. A person can shorten and lengthen the process according to the time availability and nature of urgency, but automation software cannot do that.
Manual software testing methodologies are executed manually without running any automation tools. It is one of the earliest techniques of identifying the bugs and hasn’t changed for more than the last two decades. Most coders suggest testing the software manually first and then running any automation checks. Even if you are not a technical person still, you can try manual software testing techniques as no knowledge of testing tools is needed in any manual testing process.
Systematix believes in providing only the best, and so we follow a mix of testing techniques and tools in manual testing to provide you with the best applications. Below is a compilation of some testing techniques in manual testing:
We group similar kinds of input data to complete the goal quickly and minimize the duplication of test data. We divide the inputs and outputs of the data into ‘equivalence sets’.
If an input is a 5-digit integer then we do 3 partitions as follows:
Category 1: Less than 10000
Category 2: Between 10000 and 99999
Category 3: More than 99999
So that this way, only category 2 qualifies, and anything from category 1 or 3 doesn’t qualify.
We pick the test data in this type of manual testing from the extreme levels (right near the boundary). The values can be maximum, minimum, one-less, one-more, typical, and error-causing ones. The presumption is that if the system passes the extremes, then it is efficient to work during favourable situations with typical values.
Taking the same range as above. The ideal input is 5-digit, so test input values are 00000, 09999, 10000, 99999, 100001
We establish the relationship between the input data and output action to understand the validity of the input data. Some input cases are assumed, and then tests are done manually to understand what kind of output or process happens.
Taking the same 5-digit integer example here as well.
The tester can pick some random values. Let’s assume ours picked 00450, 10000, XX999, 99999, 84612, 39671, 00000. They input each of these values, note the action that happens, and also the outcome if there is any. We insert the complete analysis in a table and use logical values to display success and failure like either 0-1 or T-F. In some cases, we use the letter x can to display the invalidity or to say that something is not applicable.
This type of manual testing is the most preferred and very easy method. Some hypothetical cases are created based on real-life situations that can be possible. Then for every case, a user persona, a machine persona, and a surrounding persona are provided.
Tester conducts test by picking one case at a time and assessing the
Usually, a flow chart is made for reference to understand the possibilities of failure. And, actions corresponding to that situation are suggested.
This kind of manual testing is the unplanned testing technique, in which the tester innovates, thinks and plans right on the spot. They do not receive a prior background of the application. When they start testing, they look for possible errors themselves and run tests purely based on their intuition or how well they learn and test.
This testing, when done to identify the possibilities of errors, is also termed as Exploratory Testing. During it, the causes of errors are explored and noted.
Ad hoc testing is done by a single person or various people in a team. Here is a list of commonly practised Approaches at Systematix:
Two or more people do it together. Including a developer helps to qualify the identified error as valid or invalid. In some cases, the team might consider something like an error, but it might be a natural part of the process. When the developer is involved, sorting such doubts gets easy.
The goal of every test in this manner is to cause failure. We consider all the otherwise conditions that do not fail the test as the possible workable condition.
Two people working combinedly as a team do the same thing at once. When one person is very technical, then another person with good command on conversational language is taken (by us at Systematix). When the project is vast, then also one person testing and one noting helps.
In any case, two brains assessing and analyzing the same thing also provides us with multiple perspectives on the same situation (Glass-half-empty, Glass-half-full!).
With a client-centric approach, Systematix Infotech is the most experienced company to test applications. Our manual software testing techniques will intelligently balance the use of tools and intellect. Talk to us!