* Estimation Technique Selection:
* Extrapolation uses historical data from similar projects to estimate effort for a new one.
* Since the current upgrade is 10% larger than the previous one, extrapolation is the most straightforward method.
* Evaluation of Options:
* A(Function points) focuses on size estimation and is not specific to historical data.
* C(Planning poker) andD(Three-point estimation) involve collaborative or probabilistic techniques, not a direct extrapolation.
* Bis correct as it directly applies historical project data to estimate effort.
References and Syllabus Alignment:
* Effort estimation techniques are covered under "Test Estimation" (TM-2.2.1) in the syllabus.

Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) is a technique used to analyze the causes of faults (defects). The technique visually models how logical relationships between failures, human errors, and external events can combine to cause specific faults to disclose1. FTA can help to determine the root cause of observed and potential failures by tracing back the fault events to their initiating causes and identifying the combinations of events that can lead to the fault occurrence2. Therefore, option A is the correct answer. Option B is incorrect because FTA is not used to select the pairs of items to be used in pairwise testing, which is a technique to generate test cases based on the combinations of two input parameters. Option C is incorrect because FTA is not a formal technique used to identify the likely effects of risks, which are uncertain events or conditions that may have a positive or negative impact on the project objectives. Option D is incorrect because FTA is not used to target defect-based testing, which is a testing technique that uses information about the types, causes, andlocations of defects discovered in previous projects to guide the selection, creation, and prioritization of test cases. References: 1: Fault Tree Analysis | ISTQB Glossary 2: Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) - Software Testing Genius : ISTQB Glossary, Pairwise Testing : ISTQB Glossary, Risk : ISTQB Glossary, Defect-Based Test Technique : Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) - Software Testing Genius : Fault Tree Analysis | ISTQB Glossary

The cost of the training and the reviews can be justified by showing the return on investment (ROI) that they generate. ROI is a measure of the profitability of an investment, calculated by dividing the net benefit by the cost1. The net benefit of the training and the reviews is the difference between the cost of the reviews and the cost of dealing with defect escapes. Defect escapes are defects that are not detected during the review process and are found later in the development or testing phases, or even in production. The cost of dealing with defect escapes includes the cost of rework, testing, debugging, deployment, customer support, and potential loss of reputation or revenue2. The cost of the reviews includes the cost of the training, the time spent by the reviewers and moderators, the tools and resources used, and the overheads3. By calculating the ROI, you can demonstrate how much money the training and the reviews have saved or earned for the company, compared to the alternative of not conducting them. Therefore, option D is the correct answer. Option A is incorrect because comparing the production defects from the previous project to the production defects from this project does not account for the cost of the reviews or the cost of dealing with defect escapes in other phases. Option B is incorrect because showing the defects that were found in the review sessions and the cost of quality regarding the perfect phase containment for those caught defects does not account for the cost of the training or the cost of dealing with defect escapes in production. Option C is incorrect because explaining that the reviews are a way of expanding the knowledge of your people and motivating them to work harder and faster is not a quantifiable or verifiable way of justifying the cost of the training and the reviews. Reference: 1: ISTQB Glossary, Return on Investment 2: ISTQB Advanced Level Test Manager Syllabus, Section 2.3.2 3: How to manage formal reviews & management audits? Skills, metrics ...

This can demotivate a tester because it implies that the tester's work is not valued or respected by the management or the stakeholders. It also suggests that the tester's efforts and skills are wasted or ineffective, as the product quality is compromised and the customer satisfaction is reduced. Testing is cut short when there is insufficient time, budget, or resources allocated for testing, or when there is pressure to release the product without adequate testing. This can lead to frustration, dissatisfaction, and loss of confidence among the testers. Top 6 things that demotivate a developerHow to Demotivate Your Best Employees References:
* Top 6 things that demotivate a developer - Amsterdam Standard
* How to Demotivate Your Best Employees - HBS Working Knowledge