This study attempted to better define trick questions and see if stude
nts could differentiate between trick and not-trick questions. Phase 1
elicited definitions of trick questions so as to identify essential c
haracteristics. Seven components were found. Phase 2 obtained ratings
to see which components of trick questions were considered to be most
crucial. The intention of the item constructor and the fact that the q
uestions had multiple correct answers received highest ratings from st
udents. Phase 3 presented a collection of statistics items, some of wh
ich were labeled on an a priori basis as being trick or not-trick. The
analysis indicated that examinees were able to statistically differen
tiate between trick and not-trick items, but the difference compared t
o chance was small. Not-trick items were more successfully sorted than
trick items, and trick items that were classified as intentional were
sorted about as well as nonintentional items. Evidence seems to sugge
st that the concept of trickiness is not as clear as some test constru
ction textbook authors suggest.