Clinical Psychology

Of course, this does not mean that one description
is as good as another for a particular case.

The Interview

Almost all professions count interviewing as a chief
technique for gathering data and making decisions.
For politicians, consumers, psychiatrists, employers,
or people in general, interviewing has always been a
major tool. As with any activity that is engaged in
frequently, people sometimes take interviewing for
granted or believe that it involves no special skills;
they can easily overestimate their understanding
of the interview process. Although many people
seem awed by the mystique of projective tests or
impressed by the psychometric intricacies of objec-
tive tests, there is an easy yet deceptive familiarity to
interviewing.
Theassessment interviewis at once the most basic
and the most serviceable technique used by the clin-
ical psychologist. In the hands of a skilled clinician,
its wide range of application and adaptability make it
a major instrument for clinical decision making,
understanding, and prediction. But for all this, we
must not lose sight of the fact that the clinical utility
of the interview can be no greater than the skill and
sensitivity of the clinician who uses it. In this section,
we discuss some basic features of the clinical inter-
view as well as the various interviewing skills and
techniques that must be mastered.

General Characteristics of Interviews

An Interaction. An interview is an interaction
between at least two persons. Each participant con-
tributes to the process, and each influences the
responses of the other. But this characterization falls
short of defining the process. Ordinary conversation
is interactional, but surely, interviewing goes beyond
that. Interviewing, like conversation, involves face-
to-face verbal encounters or exchanges. However, a
clinical interview is initiated with a goal or set of goals
in mind. The interviewer approaches the interaction
purposefully, bearing the responsibility for keeping
the interview on track and moving toward the goal.
Thus, the easy informality that often characterizes

ordinary conversation is less evident. A good inter-

view is one that is carefully planned, deliberately and

skillfully executed, and goal-oriented throughout.

Interviewing clearly takes many forms—from

fact finding to emotional release to cross-

examination. However, all forms of professionally

executed interviews are devoid of one feature that

often characterizes normal conversation: Inter-

viewers are not using the interchange to achieve

either personal satisfaction or enhanced prestige.

They are using it to elicit data, information, beliefs,

or attitudes in the most skilled fashion possible.

Interviews Versus Tests. In a sense, interviews

occupy a position somewhere between ordinary con-

versation and tests. Interviews are more purposeful

and organized than conversation but sometimes less

formalized or standardized than psychological tests.

The exceptions are the structured diagnostic inter-

views discussed later in this chapter, which in some

ways resemble standardized psychological tests.

The hallmark of psychological testing is the col-

lection of data under standardized conditions by

means of explicit procedures. Most interviews, how-

ever, make provision for at least some flexibility.

Thus, a unique characteristic of the interview

method is the wider opportunity it provides for an

individualized approach that will be effective in eli-

citing data from a particular person or patient. This

flexibility represents both the strength and the weak-

ness of many interviewing techniques. Although one

can seek information in the way that seems most

appropriate for Patient X, there is also a distinct

potential for unreliability and error. We’ll have

more to say about threats to the reliability and valid-

ity of interview data later in this chapter.

The Art of Interviewing. Interviewing has often

been regarded as an art. Except in the most struc-

tured, formal interviews, there is a degree of free-

dom to exercise one’s skill and resourcefulness that

is generally absent from other assessment proce-

dures. Decisions such as when to probe, when to

be silent, or when to be indirect or subtle test the

skill of the interviewer. With experience, one learns

to respond to interviewee cues in a progressively

more sensitive fashion that ultimately serves the

THE ASSESSMENT INTERVIEW 165