Manual software testing is one of the main things that need to ensure the quality and reliability of software applications. The differentiation between manual testing and automatic testing is due to its human intervention, where actual human beings participate in conducting test cases, bug tracking, and verifying the correct functionality. Knowing when, where, and how to apply these techniques is critical for obtaining comprehensive test coverage and building reliable software products. It is very useful in the situations when a human can observe and make judgments. For example, in the usability testing or exploratory testing, such scenarios become very handy. Once there is knowledge about proper contexts and methods for manual testing, software teams can better utilize its efficiency along with automated testing approaches.
What is manual software testing?
Manual software testing is a process in which without using any kind of automation tool, a tester manually conducts the test cases to figure out faults and ascertain the fact that the software would meet specific requirements. This method functions on a human's observation and estimation to ascertain functionality, usability, and general performance. For example, a tester manually tests a login feature of a web application by entering different combinations of usernames and passwords to ensure proper error handling, correct redirects, and secure authentication. This hands-on approach is essential for scenarios that require human judgment, such as checking the user interface or exploring unanticipated issues.
Understanding different stages of Manual software testing
- Understanding Requirements: Analyse software requirements to identify what needs to be tested.
- Test Case Design: Preparation of step-by-step guidelines for testing cases based on the requirements.
- Running Test Cases: Test running by interacting with the application.
- Bug Identification and Reporting: Identify errors, report it to the developers by giving them the details to communicate.
- Validating Bug Fixes: The application run after the problems have been solved by developers for checking the removal of errors without causing new ones.
We will use the practices of manual software testing when in the SDLC, we have to use human judgment, intuition, and creativity in order to estimate the quality of a software application. They are very efficient in applications like exploratory testing wherein test cases have not been predefined or in usability testing wherein user experience and interface are being checked. For example, while developing an application on a mobile platform, a tester may use several screens manually to catch bugs like buttons not correctly aligned or unclear instructions, which can affect user satisfaction. In addition, in short-term projects or cases where automation is not viable due to cost or time constraints, manual testing is preferred.
How we use manual software testing for the detection, identification, and rectification of bug or error?
Manual software testing is applied for detecting, identifying, and rectifying bugs or errors. It follows a structured approach wherein the tester analyses the requirements of the software to understand the expected behaviour and then creates detailed test cases. During the execution, the tester manually interacts with the application simulating real-world scenarios to find out the problems. For instance, the tester can enter an invalid value in the input field of a form, and thus try out how the application works if there are errors. Once he gets a bug, this same is recorded with the steps to reproduce, snapshots and logs, and this information is transmitted to the developers. Again, testers test the application with all the bugs that had been introduced cleared up, and nothing new was created, ensuring the software of high quality.
Manual testing will help find bugs in the software? Is it the only way to detect bugs?
Manual testing is quite effective for finding bugs in software, especially regarding usability, design inconsistency, or functionality requiring human judgment. For example, a manual tester could see that a button is aligned wrongly, error message not clear, or some complex workflows behaviour, which will be missed by automated tools. However, this is not the sole methodology to use for detecting bugs. Repetitive, data-intensive testing or large test activities, for example regression testing or performance testing requires automation testing. Together, manual and automation testing ensure a broad approach in using the complementary strengths of both methods toward the delivery of high-quality software.
6 Examples of Manual Software Testing
- Exploratory Testing: The tester will check the application without a test case. It's for finding unknown bugs or edge cases.
- Usability Testing: Checks on user interface and experience so that the application should be intuitive and user-friendly.
- Ad Hoc Testing: The testing where testers do some random activities with the application to find bugs, without any formal documentation.
- Cross-Browser Testing: Manually checking how a web application behaves on different browsers to ensure compatibility.
- Localization Testing: Check whether the application is perfectly localized or compatible with languages, regions, or cultural formats.
- Installation Testing: Checking that the software installation, updates, or removal process runs well without glitches.
Conclusion
In other words, manual testing methodologies are part of the software development lifecycle that, in an unprecedented manner, allows exploiting human judgment and creativity for problem identification and solving. These techniques excel in situations where on-site evaluation is necessary, for example, usability testing or exploratory testing and complement automated testing. Understanding how and where to use all these techniques and knowing exactly how will help the team deliver a balanced and inclusive test strategy that is characterized by delivering high-quality and user-friendly applications with adequate reliability and functionality.
0 Comments