It’s interesting to me the ways in which Computer Science exams attempt to deceive students. The trick that sometimes gets me is the unnecessary-answer-inversion modification: start out with a mostly straightforward question and make the correct answer the opposite of what would be expected.
The example above contains a second artificial layer of difficulty through the use of nonsense words in an inheritance hierarchy. After reading the code, any reasonable person would question the name Bango and how it relates to a Bingo and Bongo. It’s at this point that one must accept the game that’s being played between the educator and the learner. Sadly, induced cognitive stutterings are one particular result of the malformed educational transaction that is occurring.
Another trick that works on me 100% of the time is the unnecessary-details-about-awesome-rock-and-roll-band modification:
In this case, I started thinking about how I would much rather be playing bongos along to Houses of the Holy 
than taking this stupid test.
