Concluding what the data doesn't say
In True/False/Cannot-say questions, 'Cannot say' is correct whenever the statement needs information the exhibit doesn't contain — however plausible the statement sounds. Plausibility is not evidence.
Why your brain does this
Your brain auto-completes with world knowledge: 'revenue grew, so profit probably grew.' The test is measuring exactly whether you can suppress that reflex and reason only from what's given.
The fix
For each statement ask: "could I point to the cells that PROVE this?" If proving it needs an assumption — about a year not shown, a category not listed, a causal link — the answer is Cannot say. Treat confident-sounding statements with missing data as the trap they are.
See the trap in a real question
| Department | Staff |
|---|---|
| Logistics | 20 |
| QA | 45 |
| Packing | 85 |
| Assembly | 50 |
Using the table, is this True, False, or Cannot say? Statement: More than half of Packing's staff are aged under 30.
Check whether the exhibit actually contains the data the statement needs. If it isn't derivable from what's shown, the answer is Cannot say — not False. The correct answer is Cannot say. Traps to avoid: False comes from the "assumed from absent data" error; True comes from the "assumed from absent data" error.
Where it strikes
This trap appears in 12 of our questions, across: Cannot say.
Do you make this mistake?
The free diagnostic doesn’t just score you — it names the mistakes behind your wrong answers, this one included.
Find out — free test