CBN Aptitude Test common mistakes
CBN Aptitude Test · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In quantitative word problems, grabbing the numbers and computing immediately without first writing down what quantity is being asked for (e.g., profit vs. selling price, total vs. per-unit).
Time pressure and a habit of pattern-matching to familiar formulas; the last line of the question is often read fastest and least carefully.
What to do instead
Before calculating, underline the final question line and write a one-line 'target' statement (e.g., 'find cost price, not profit'). Only then select the formula.
Estimating or rounding prematurely in multi-step numerical problems, then selecting an answer choice that matches the rounded intermediate value.
Mental arithmetic feels faster than exact working, and answer choices are often designed around the rounded result.
What to do instead
Carry exact values through all steps and round only at the end; keep scratch work column-aligned and re-check the final digit before choosing.
Answering verbal comprehension questions from prior knowledge or personal opinion instead of the passage's stated position.
Familiar topics trigger automatic agreement or disagreement, and 'true in the world' feels the same as 'true in the passage'.
What to do instead
For each option, locate the specific sentence in the passage that supports or contradicts it; reject any option with no textual anchor, even if it seems factually correct.
Missing the scope of a verbal question stem-confusing 'which is NOT stated', 'the author would most likely agree', and 'the main point'-and answering the wrong question.
Stems look similar under speed, and candidates skim them after having already formed an impression of the passage.
What to do instead
Read the stem first, classify it (detail / inference / main idea / EXCEPT), and circle the operative word before returning to the passage.
In abstract reasoning, forming a hypothesis from the first one or two figures of a sequence and committing to an answer without testing it against the later figures.
The first plausible rule often fits the opening figures by coincidence, and confirmation bias suppresses checking.
What to do instead
Derive a candidate rule, then explicitly verify it against every figure in the series, including the one immediately before the missing item.
In logical reasoning, treating 'some A are B' as implying 'some A are not B', or reversing a conditional ('if P then Q' therefore 'if Q then P').
Everyday conversational implicature differs from formal logic, and the invalid forms sound natural in ordinary speech.
What to do instead
Translate each premise into a diagram or symbolic form before evaluating; test conclusions by constructing a counterexample rather than by intuition.
Spending disproportionate time on one hard general-knowledge item and then rushing the remaining questions, leaving easy marks unclaimed.
Sunk-cost thinking on a single question plus anxiety about an unfamiliar fact.
What to do instead
Set a hard per-question time cap, mark and skip unfamiliar items immediately, and return only after all answerable questions are done.
Relying on outdated memorised facts for current affairs (former officeholders, superseded currency or policy figures) instead of the current position.
Study material and memory are often months old, and exam items are written to the current date.
What to do instead
Before the exam, refresh a dated one-page sheet of current officeholders, recent policy rates, and major recent events; discard notes older than the review window.
Confusing gross versus net, nominal versus real, and stock versus flow concepts when answering economics items (e.g., treating GDP as a stock, or ignoring inflation when comparing values across years).
These distinctions are taught together and share vocabulary, so they blur under recall pressure.
What to do instead
Build a two-column contrast table for each pair (gross/net, nominal/real, stock/flow) with a one-line definition and example, and recite it before practice sets.
In English usage items, choosing the option that 'sounds right' rather than applying the specific rule being tested (subject-verb agreement across intervening phrases, pronoun case, misplaced modifiers).
Spoken-language patterns diverge from written standard usage, and intervening clauses mask the true subject or antecedent.
What to do instead
For each sentence, bracket and remove interrupting phrases to expose the subject-verb or pronoun-antecedent pair, then apply the rule explicitly before selecting.