Recent meta-analyses have suggested that the validity of interviews is much higher than previously reported. However, three issues are unresolved: individual differences in interviewer validity, incremental validity, and fairness of interviews. These issues were examined using ratings on 12 interview dimensions, SAT scores, and high school rank in a sample of freshmen admitted over a two-year period to a highly selective university (N = 860). Overall the interview was not a significant predictor of freshman GPA, and it provided no incremental validity over SAT and rank. The interview was valid for non-science/engineering majors (r =.12), but differential prediction among majors was not indicated. No individual interviewer (experienced or inexperienced) had a significant observed or incremental validity. The interview was valid for the first sample year (r =.12) but not the second. Implications for the use of interviews in personnel selection and college admissions are discussed.