Terrific analysis, thank you! I love reading your posts. I also think that the dynamics differ based on the mode of interviewing viz. Faceless (like http://int

Terrific analysis, thank you! I love reading your posts. I also think that the dynamics differ based on the mode of interviewing viz. Faceless (like http://interviewing.io http://interviewing.io does) vs face-ful (like normal onsite or video interviews, or the way http://interviewkickstart.com http://interviewkickstart.com does). I have an observation to share for the latter kind of interviews: When I was hiring at Box for one of my teams (or even now), I'd generally go towards the end, to meet the candidate and talk to them about how the day went. I'd ask them about specific interviews, the interviewers and how they think they did on the given problems. I found that it was surprisingly rare to get a candidate who was aware enough of how things went (positive or otherwise). Digging into it, I realized that the correlation of what the candidate perceived, was simply to how expressive the interviewER was. If the interviewer was friendly and chatty, the candidate would feel like they have done well (or at least forgivably well). If the interviewer was more silent, the candidate would feel they haven't done very well. Now that I do interview training for a living, I try and hammer this point home: that interviews are like a date. It depends a lot on the other person (in this case, the interviewer). Understanding this well often works like magic.