R9990/2026-03-31/C001/SRC05

Research	R9990 — STAR Interview Format and Neurodivergence
Run	2026-03-31
Claim	C001
Search	S04
Result	S04-R02
Source	SRC05

Itentio — Why the STAR Interview Method is Flawed

Source

Field	Value
Title	Why the STAR Interview Method is Flawed
Publisher	Itentio IT Recruitment Agency
Author(s)	invlastor
Date	2024-06-24
URL	https://itentio.com/blog/why-star-interview-method-is-flawed/
Type	Professional commentary

Summary

Dimension	Rating
Reliability	Medium-Low
Relevance	Medium
Bias: Missing data	Some concerns
Bias: Measurement	N/A
Bias: Selective reporting	Some concerns
Bias: Randomization	N/A — not an RCT
Bias: Protocol deviation	N/A — not an RCT
Bias: COI/Funding	Some concerns

Rationale

Dimension	Rationale
Reliability	Recruitment agency blog post. No citations to research. Arguments are logical but unsupported by empirical data. Medium-Low because the bias analysis is reasonable but unverified.
Relevance	Addresses STAR flaws generally but does not mention neurodivergence. The identified biases (favoring articulateness, stress effects) are relevant to the claim by inference.
Bias flags	Itentio is a recruitment agency — COI concern that criticizing STAR may serve their business model of alternative assessment. Selective reporting: only criticisms presented, no acknowledgment of STAR's benefits.

Evidence Extracts

Evidence ID	Summary
SRC05-E01	STAR's structural flaws: selection bias toward articulateness, stress-induced cognitive impairment, limited assessment scope, four specific bias types identified