tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post2807555694271665517..comments2023-04-27T21:49:40.652+06:00Comments on A Rapid Tester: Are you paying attention?Sajjadul Hakimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11808096246546078644noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-74498621004142338352007-09-13T19:35:00.000+06:002007-09-13T19:35:00.000+06:00Debasis,That was a great video. I had seen the bal...Debasis,<BR/><BR/>That was a great video. I had seen the ball passing part of the video from Cem Kaner and James Bach's online BBST lessons (testingeducation.org). But not your version of the video with the commentary. Thanks for sharing that.Sajjadul Hakimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808096246546078644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-87014279176983213032007-09-13T17:18:00.000+06:002007-09-13T17:18:00.000+06:00Great post Sajjadul! Inattentional Blindness is so...Great post Sajjadul! <BR/><BR/>Inattentional Blindness is something, which many testers suffer from without ever realizing it! I had posted an article on this topic a couple of months before. Hope you would like it. <A HREF="http://software-testing-zone.blogspot.com/2007/07/are-you-tester-expect-unexpected.html" REL="nofollow">Inattentional Blindness and Testers</A><BR/><BR/>Regards,<BR/>-Debasis<BR/><A HREF="http://software-testing-zone.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">Software Testing Zone</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-45803216185140392312007-09-12T23:46:00.000+06:002007-09-12T23:46:00.000+06:00Testinggeek,That was a good outline of the reasons...Testinggeek,<BR/><BR/>That was a good outline of the reasons behind inattentional blindness. Also your example of pair testing is probably what James referred to as distributed cognition.<BR/><BR/>I still did not get the chance to further analyze this interesting concept of distributed cognition, but it is my homework. Thanks.Sajjadul Hakimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808096246546078644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-77151896622345874172007-09-12T20:20:00.000+06:002007-09-12T20:20:00.000+06:00Sajjadul,Very interesting post. After reading your...Sajjadul,<BR/><BR/>Very interesting post. After reading your post I was reading Inattentional blindness on Wikipedia. It made me think on how our existing knowledge about domain/technology (or lack of it) can act as a catalyst in increasing this blindness. If I already have any pre-conceived notion of how some thing should work (technically or functionally) It might be affecting me with this blindness. Having some one working with you (Testing in Pair) or continue collaboration with the developers/customers are something that can be used to make sure that our testing activities are not affected by this. <BR/><BR/>Nice post.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-10192429043148253752007-09-11T18:05:00.000+06:002007-09-11T18:05:00.000+06:00Shrini,You have made some good points. Thanks."One...Shrini,<BR/><BR/>You have made some good points. Thanks.<BR/><BR/>"One possible solution is to defocus as often as you can"<BR/><BR/>That is a good advise. Can you please elaborate the following part of your comment:<BR/><BR/>"May be it is "thinking between alternating polarities" while doing ET - doing vs explaining, fast vs slow, reading vs doing, focussing vs defocussing."<BR/><BR/>I am not sure what you meant by "fast vs slow". Thanks again.Sajjadul Hakimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808096246546078644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-24723238068249238682007-09-11T17:48:00.000+06:002007-09-11T17:48:00.000+06:00James,You have tickled my curiosity. Distributed C...James,<BR/><BR/>You have tickled my curiosity. Distributed Cognition is a great new perspective to my example. I WILL explore this.Sajjadul Hakimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808096246546078644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-31014320764599420802007-09-11T14:04:00.000+06:002007-09-11T14:04:00.000+06:00Good post Sajjad -->>Also, exploratory testing is ...Good post Sajjad --<BR/><BR/>>>Also, exploratory testing is supposed to be better at minimizing inattentional blindness.<BR/><BR/>Why do you think so? what elements in ET help you to minimize inattentional blindness?<BR/><BR/>Let me take a guess and answer --<BR/><BR/>May be it is "thinking between alternating polarities" while doing ET - doing vs explaining, fast vs slow, reading vs doing, focussing vs defocussing.<BR/><BR/>In my opinion inattentional blindness happens due to "heavy" focus on one or more "atomic" aspects of bigger object under observation. One possible solution is to defocus as often as you can.<BR/><BR/>A related phrase (a kind of antonym) I use is "your eyes will see what you would like to see". This is more dominant theme in scripted testing where a tester is "pre-programmed" observe only expected results.<BR/><BR/><BR/>ShriniShrini Kulkarnihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10782753752478547381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-19318856570569484152007-09-11T11:44:00.000+06:002007-09-11T11:44:00.000+06:00Sajjadul, what a wonderful example. Testing is a l...Sajjadul, what a wonderful example. <BR/><BR/>Testing is a lot like fishing. You try to create conditions that maximize your chances for catching something tasty. Exploratory testing is a little more like fishing, because just as with real life fishermen, the tester continually reads the conditions, draws inferences about the location of the fish, and adjusts the process.<BR/><BR/>I like your description of inattentional blindness, and I accept the point you made, but don't forget another dynamic that you put in motion-- one that is very much an exploratory strategy-- distributed cognition. Your testing comprised not only what you noticed, but what other people noticed at the same time. <BR/><BR/>By provide more room to view the application, you made it *possible* for you to see something unexpected, but by also by doing so and by doing the demonstration live and encouraging audience response, you made it even more *probable* that your *group* would discover those problems.<BR/><BR/>-- JamesJames Marcus Bachhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09985950531079499844noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-38181488842210631012007-09-08T12:50:00.000+06:002007-09-08T12:50:00.000+06:00Tarafder,Thank you for clarifying your comment. It...Tarafder,<BR/><BR/>Thank you for clarifying your comment. It is an interesting observation.Sajjadul Hakimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808096246546078644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-5872825659140667712007-09-08T12:24:00.000+06:002007-09-08T12:24:00.000+06:00Sajjadul,But that does not mean that your inattent...Sajjadul,<BR/><BR/><I>But that does not mean that your inattentional blindness reduces. Rather, the consequence of inattentional blindness reduces.</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, that's true. But what I meant was if I test other's program, my "Inattentional blindness" will be reduced as compared to the case if I test my own program myself. The fact is that you thought of the program as constant and the tester is varying and I thought the tester is constant and the programs he is testing are varying. In a few words, if I test my program, "Inattentional blindness" is high but if i test other's program, "Inattentional blindness" might be low enough compared to the first case.<BR/><BR/>Please do correct me if I misunderstood your reply.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-10454567770739457092007-09-07T23:52:00.000+06:002007-09-07T23:52:00.000+06:00Tarafder,Thank for sharing your experience. Howeve...Tarafder,<BR/><BR/>Thank for sharing your experience. However I would want to make a slight correction to your comment.<BR/><BR/>I think what you mean is that when you have a second person do the same testing, there is a better chance that some of the problems that you overlooke due to inattentional blindness will be detected by the second pair of eyes. But that does not mean that your inattentional blindness reduces. Rather, the consequence of inattentional blindness reduces.<BR/><BR/>Do correct me if I misunderstood your comment.Sajjadul Hakimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11808096246546078644noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812243512866181275.post-24633264004417077592007-09-07T23:20:00.000+06:002007-09-07T23:20:00.000+06:00Yes, that is true. The far you go, the wider the v...Yes, that is true. The far you go, the wider the viewing angle become. I used to do observe things from a bit far when i wanted to see them all and realize the issues. "Inattentional blindness" greatly reduces when the programmer and the tester are two different person. As for my case, I make the programs and I myself test them. As a result I only look for bugs at those portions only where I expect them. The other bugs some time remain hidden for this "inattentional blindness". This would not be the case if the tester was a different person than me. We should be aware of where we are paying attention. You are quite right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com