At a time when my peers —and myself— are interviewing for competitive summer internships and future job opportunities, it is interesting to be an interviewer.

Not exactly though, I should explain.

A reporter for my university's newspaper, I write roughly 6 articles each month and each article has at least 3 sources; this means I conduct an average of 18 interviews every 30 days — arguably more than the average college student.

Of course, this is by no means the same as interviewing or being interviewed for a job. One is based on evaluation, while the other supposedly results in an objective report. And yes, there are a variety of other differences. However, central to both is the extraction of information, the asking of questions, and the formulation of answers.

Though not nearly as experienced an interviewee as an interviewer, I would argue I've learned a thing or two from being the one who asks the questions, and I think it's quite interesting what I've observed.

For one thing, people, especially young people — myself included, I've noticed as I listen to recorded interviews — cannot get through more than a couple sentences without using the expressions "like," "um," or "you know." They're wired into us as though we are robots.

And honestly, it's easy to understand why. We're speaking ... maybe losing our train of thought, maybe not sure exactly what we're trying to say, or alternatively, we know what we want to say but we want to make sure we don't sound too confident, arrogant, or assertive. We want to make sure we're not overstepping or saying something that could be misconstrued, and so we insert words like "like" and "you know" to make us seem not as certain, but still express the point.

The other day I was writing an article for my university's newspaper and in an interview, I asked a student about their thoughts on campus diversity — a known shortcoming at my school.

"So, with regard to diversity, what are your thoughts?" I asked, "Do you think... you know ... the University could be doing a better job — or like — they're not doing as well they could be? What are some effective and ineffective measures they've taken to improve diversity?"

The irony is that the question makes absolutely perfect sense without the use of like or you know, and I really wouldn't sound assertive or too confident if I were to lose the filler expressions. In fact, the question would come across in pretty much the same way. Alternatively, it's funny that I knew exactly the question I wanted to ask, but it still came out with these unnecessary words.

Nevertheless, this happens all the time in interview responses as well.

Second ... some people love being interviewed and some people hate being interviewed, and it is completely clear which person is which.

Of course, this is probably different for a job interview versus a journalistic interview, but I would argue there are similar fundamentals at play.

People who like interviews can talk for several minutes nonstop. "Minutes" may not seem like long at all, but it is when you're an interviewer and have several questions to get through. It also is when the person gets so into the question that they go off on an unrelated tangent.

On the other hand, people who don't like being interviewed seem to say one or two words. It feels like the interviewer is doing more talking than the interviewee, which should never be the case. Again, in a journalistic interview, this makes sense. People may be afraid that they will come across poorly or sound dumb. Plus, if it's a sensitive topic, they may also be reluctant to provide information.

Still, it is completely clear to the interviewer whether you're hesitant, perfectly comfortable, or somewhere in between.

Third, sometimes people —simply— do not answer the question.

I'm not sure if this on purpose or by accident, but it's completely true. In some ways, this finding relates to whether or not someone wants to be interviewed. If they're uncomfortable or if it's a sensitive topic, it makes sense for them to express hesitancy and —sometimes— avoid the question. They're likely to steer the conversation in another direction, tell you —the interviewer— that your question is highlighting the wrong things, and insist on answering a completely unrelated question to avoid the discussion you're looking to have.

On the other hand, if someone is knowledgeable on the topic and comfortable in the interview, they may answer the question in a variety of ways, providing several sets of ideas.

Nevertheless, though I admit I need to improve on all of these things as an interviewee, my time as an interviewer has undoubtedly made me more aware of certain trends.

Though not exactly the same, I can imagine some of these findings transfer into other professional settings, such as job interviews.

I would insist everyone conduct an interview or two. After all, it can be really engaging —depending on the subject, that is— and you may learn a thing or two about how to be a better interviewee.