Skip to main content
Peer-Reviewed Research

Can AI Really Conduct Quality Interviews?

Peer-reviewed research says yes. Here's what the data shows.

5+ peer-reviewed studies
7,000+ participants analyzed

The Verdict

"AI-conducted interviews produce data quality comparable to human-led interviews, with the added benefit of infinite scalability."

— Consensus from multiple peer-reviewed studies

Honest Trade-offs

AI and human interviewers have different strengths. We're transparent about both.

Where AI Excels

Research-backed advantages

  • Active Listening94%

    94% of active listening failures were human interviewers, only 6% were AI. AI consistently restates and confirms understanding.

    Wuttke et al., 2024
  • Protocol Adherence100%

    AI follows interview guidelines with perfect consistency. No drift, no skipped questions, no improvised tangents.

    Wuttke et al., 2024
  • Consistency at Scale

    The 500th AI interview is identical in quality to the 1st. No fatigue, no bad days, no unconscious bias drift.

    Multiple studies
  • Cost Efficiency~$5

    Once configured, AI interviews cost pennies per conversation vs $200-500+ for fully loaded human interviews.

    User Interviews, 2025
  • 24/7 AvailabilityAlways

    Respondents complete interviews on their schedule, in their timezone, at 2 AM if that's when they're comfortable.

    Async advantage
  • Infinite Scale1000+

    Interview 1,000 people as easily as 10. No calendar coordination, no interviewer bandwidth limits.

    Platform capability

Where Humans Lead

Being honest about limits

  • Unexpected Follow-ups88%

    88% of failures to probe unclear or surprising answers were by AI. Skilled human moderators pivot better on unexpected responses.

    Wuttke et al., 2024
  • Emotional RapportEdge

    For deeply sensitive topics requiring extended trust-building, human interviewers retain an edge in emotional connection.

    Wuttke et al., 2024
  • Non-verbal CuesVisual

    In-person human interviewers can read body language, facial expressions, and tone in ways text-based AI cannot.

    In-person only

The Bottom Line

Human interviewers remain better at one thing: unexpected follow-up probing. When a respondent says something completely off-script, skilled human moderators can pivot and dig deeper. But here's the thing: for structured stakeholder research with clear objectives—which is what most organizations need—AI's perfect consistency and active listening actually produce better results.

The Numbers That Matter

Research-backed metrics from AI interviewing studies.

70%
Higher completion

63% short survey completion vs 37% long surveys

80%
Cost reduction

Traditional interviews cost $200-300 each vs ~$5 with Hallway

4x
Faster insights

48 hours vs 2-3 weeks for traditional interview cycles

55%
Better quality

Quality score of 6.8/10 vs 4.4/10 with tailored questions

The Bottom Line

For most internal stakeholder research, AI interviewing isn't a compromise—it's an upgrade. You get the depth of real conversations with the scale of surveys, minus the calendar chaos.

Try AI Interviews Free

Ready to ditch the calendar Tetris?

Interview everyone across your org. Schedule no one. Start collecting voice interviews today.

View Pricing

Free to start. No credit card required.