My interviews have varied between scholarship, school programs, and job interviews. Each has different types of roles interviewing but with the same goal of selecting the best candidate. Within each experience, I have dealt with great interviews and interviews that felt forced or that didn’t make me feel comfortable. The most typical and more comfortable interviews are unstructured interviews. They typically feel like an ongoing conversation where you still get asked questions that pertain to the job but aren’t questions that you can pull from a catalog. These were far more effective because you got to learn about the person’s personality and determine if they are the right fit. The interviews type I felt didn’t go so well and was ineffective, are the structured interviews where I was asked a set of questions that were written on paper. As I would be interviewed, they would write down the things I was saying. These had an abundance of long awkward pauses as they finished writing. It made the interviewee feel no connection to the employer or scholarship committee. The unstructured vs the structured interview weighs differently when it comes to relativity, validity, and utility. Starting with being reliable my experience with the unstructured interview was less reliable because each interviewee can go in a different direction, a structured interview keeps the interview on track and comparable. The validity can be stated the same way between those two methods where it makes the interview more comparable for structured vs unstructured. Lastly, in my experience, they will get more out of me during an unstructured interview, and I am more likely to take that job if I was interviewing for more than one company. If I could go back and advise to provide a more effective interview, I would let the interviewers know to keep writing down answers of the interview at a minimum. They could go back after the interview was over and take some notes. That way they are not interfering with a positive experience.