See how AI can improve clarity in live interviews, and the scenarios where it undermines fairness and accuracy.

Abhishek Kaushik
Dec 2, 2025
TL;DR
AI can improve interviews when it:
Helps candidates think more clearly
Reduces anxiety
Enables brainstorming
Levels the playing field for non-native speakers
AI backfires when it:
Replaces reasoning with answer generation
Enables proxy or coached participation
Reduces the interviewer’s ability to evaluate ownership
The solution is not to allow AI everywhere or ban it entirely.
It is to allow AI for planning, not for producing.

The Key Distinction
There are two types of thinking in interviews:
Thinking Type | Purpose | AI Involvement |
|---|---|---|
Planning | Structuring approach, brainstorming, clarifying | AI can assist |
Reasoning | Making decisions, tradeoffs, and adjustments | AI must not replace the candidate |
Your policy should reinforce:
AI may assist thinking
AI may not perform thinking
This makes interviews both fair and accurate.
When Allowing AI Improves Signal in Live Interviews
1. Clarifying Problem Understanding
Candidates can ask AI:
Definitions
Terminology explanations
Syntax reminders
This reduces bias toward:
Native speakers
Candidates who memorize textbook terms
People who speak confidently but understand less
Signal Gains:
You see how the candidate restates the problem, not just how they remember it.
2. Brainstorming Alternative Approaches
AI can provide:
Outline-level guidance
Examples of patterns
Ideas to compare
The real signal is how the candidate evaluates the suggestions.
Ask:
Which of these options would you choose and why?
This reveals tradeoff awareness.
3. Organizing Their Communication
AI helps candidates:
Structure their explanation
Reduce rambling
Speak more clearly
This benefits:
Neurodivergent candidates
Early-career candidates
Non-native English speakers
Note:
Clarity is not evidence of competence.
Reasoning still must be tested.
When Allowing AI Backfires
1. Generating Full Coding Solutions
If AI writes the code:
There is no signal of debugging ability
There is no demonstration of decision-making
You measure only copy-paste speed
What to do instead:
Ask follow-ups that reveal understanding:
If we doubled input size, where would performance break?
Authentic engineers can answer.
Copy-paste cannot.
2. Producing Scripted Behavioral Answers
AI makes it easy to generate:
Polished leadership stories
Conflict-resolution narratives
Perfect feedback cycles
These hide:
Ownership
Personal accountability
Real tradeoff decisions
The fix:
Use change probing:
What surprised you during that project?
Scripted stories rarely include surprises.
3. Assisting Proxy or Background Coaching
This is where integrity collapses.
Common signs:
Delayed responses of identical pacing
Candidate never paraphrases
Answers sound generalized and context-free
Sherlock detects this automatically through:
Voice identity match
Behavioral reasoning inference
Typing pattern continuity
Background audio model comparison
This prevents fraud without suppressing fair AI use.
The Balanced Interview AI Policy (Copy This)
Allowed:
Using AI to clarify terminology
Using AI to outline options
Using AI to structure explanations
Not Allowed:
Using AI to generate final answers
Using AI to produce complete code
Receiving live coaching during the interview
Candidate Script:
This sets expectations clearly and neutrally.
How to Measure Whether AI Helped or Hurt the Signal
Do not score:
Fluency
Confidence
Speed
Score:
Adaptability
Tradeoff clarity
Error ownership
Decision reasoning
If reasoning collapses when constraints change:
The answer was not truly theirs.

Conclusion
The future of interviewing is not AI-free and not AI-driven.
It is AI-aware.
When candidates:
Use AI to think better, not to think instead
You get higher signal and fairer decisions.
With Sherlock AI providing:
Identity continuity checks
Real-time reasoning integrity signals
Interviewers can allow open tools without losing trust in the result.
This is how to hire accurately in the AI era.



