So… it was the chicken that ruined your interview

Imagine you’re in prison.

You’ve been there for a few years, but you’ve done everything right.

Good behavior.
No incidents.
Even the guards say you’ve got a real shot at early release.

Your parole hearing is coming up soon, and you’ve heard your judge is fair and friendly.

So you go in, answer all the questions, and try to stay calm and respectful.

And then… the judge looks at your file and says, “Denied.”
You’re staying in.

They break for lunch.

After the meal, another inmate goes in.
Same crime. Same sentence. Same behavior.

The only difference is the timing.
When he had his hearing.

And he walks out a free man.

You? Back to your cell, wondering wtf just happened.

It was the chicken that made the difference.

The hungry judge effect

In 2011, researchers Jonathan Levav and colleagues published a study that shook the idea of rational decision-making.

They analyzed over 1,000 parole decisions made by Israeli judges and found a shocking pattern:

Judges were more likely to grant parole early in the morning or immediately after a meal, with approval rates of around 65%.

As the session went on, that rate dropped to nearly zero (!) before the next break.

Let me repeat that - they dropped from 65% to nearly 0%. Insane.

Same judges.
Same cases.
Different timing.

The researchers called it a textbook case of decision fatigue, when the brain, after making too many judgments, defaults to the safest option.

Now replace judges with interviewers and parole hearings with job interviews.

See the problem?

Interviewers are also hungry.

Like judges, interviewers make multiple decisions in a day.

Their mental energy depletes, and as fatigue sets in, they unconsciously favour the status quo:

And for nearly all of us, keeping the status quo means:

rejecting risk,
avoiding uncertainty,
and saying “no” more often.

That’s why candidates interviewed earlier in the day or right after a break often have better outcomes.

It’s not luck.

It’s neuroscience.

Protip: If you get to choose your interview slot, pick the morning or the first slot after lunch.
You’ll face a fresher, more open-minded interviewer with more mental bandwidth to actually listen to you.

Bottom line is:
You can be the most qualified person in the room and still lose.
Not because you’re unfit but because you don’t understand how humans make decisions under pressure.

So here’s what I’d want you to know: 5 things that actually make or break interviews (and none of them are about how smart you are):

1) First impression creates mental anchors

One of the first things I always teach is to go in with a smile on your face.

It’s not about pretending to be happy.
It’s about setting the tone.

That first moment, how you enter the room, how you sound, how you look at the camera - it shapes everything that follows.

Because even experienced recruiters fall prey to confirmation bias.

Once they form an initial impression, their brain filters everything else to confirm it.
If they like you early, you’ll continue to sound smart.
If they don’t, you’ll have to fight uphill.

How to use it:

Your first 60 seconds might matter more than the next 30 minutes (so make it count).
Speak with confidence, warmth, and structure using the STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result).
Treat the first question as a framing device. It sets the tone for everything that follows.

2) Fatigue kills fairness

Have you ever had multiple meetings in one day?
Do you remember how focused you were during the last ones?

Probably not much.
You just wanted them to end so you could get back to your real work.

It’s the same for interviewers. Especially if they aren't recruiters.
By the third or fourth interview of the day, their cognitive performance drops.
They get more critical, less empathetic, and start relying on snap judgments.

How to use it:

Whenever possible, choose earlier time slots.
If you can’t, bring energy, clarity, and simplicity.
Avoid friction. Be precise, structured, and clear in presenting your thoughts.
Make it easy for a tired brain to say “yes.”

3) Be on the same wavelength

Humans trust people who feel familiar.

It’s an old survival mechanism.

Our brains see similarity as safety.
When someone talks, moves, or reacts in a way that feels like us, we unconsciously relax.

That’s why candidates who subtly mirror an interviewer’s tone, rhythm, or energy are often rated as more likeable and competent.

It’s not manipulation.
It’s resonance.

We might not like to admit it, but we all do the same in everyday life.
We feel closer to people who act like us, think like us, and move through the world in a way that feels familiar.

How to use it:

Mirror energy, not behaviour (that's just cringe).
If they’re calm, slow down. If they’re direct, tighten your answers.
Think of it like tuning into the same emotional frequency, not imitating but resonating.
It’s like trying to be on the same wavelength.

4) Everyone polishes their story (some people just do it better than others)

Only about 25% of candidates tell the real reason they left their last job.
The rest go with safe answers like “new challenges” or “growth opportunities.”
But seasoned recruiters can sense when something’s off.

If you decide to tell the real reason, never talk shit about your previous employer, manager, or colleagues.
And I mean it.

No matter how friendly or relaxed the recruiter seems, speaking negatively about others instantly raises a red flag.

I always try to create a very relaxed, open atmosphere during interviews so people feel comfortable.
And sometimes, that comfort leads them to overshare in ways that aren’t exactly diplomatic.
Even if I understand their frustration, it still impacts how I see them.

Because if someone speaks that way to a stranger they just met, I can only imagine how they’ll communicate with teammates after a few months on the job.

How to use it:

Be honest, but diplomatic.
Reframe departures as learning moments: “I realised I thrive in smaller, more collaborative teams.”
Remember, authenticity always beats perfection.

5) Group Interviews don’t test your skills

They are more about composure and how well you can hold your frame.

When several people observe you, whether in a room or on a video call, your brain enters a mild state of survival mode.
Heart rate rises, focus narrows, and creativity drops.

That’s not a lack of confidence.
It’s biology.

Your body is wired to see multiple pairs of eyes as a sign of threat, not opportunity.
In online panels, this effect can be even stronger.

You see a grid of silent faces, some with cameras off, and it’s hard to read the energy in the room.

So you keep talking, trying to fill the silence and end up oversharing or rambling.

How to use it:

Slow down your pace.
It will feel strange, but it projects calm and control.
Rotate your attention.
If you’re online, occasionally glance at the camera to simulate eye contact with everyone. In person, make brief eye contact with each interviewer. It signals confidence and inclusion.
Treat it like a conversation, not an interrogation. A good panel isn’t testing how perfectly you perform, but how well you handle complexity and pressure.

Interviews are less about logic (like it or not) and more about psychology: energy, timing, bias, and perception.

Once you understand those forces, you stop guessing what they want.

You start leading the room.

And that's my dear, the moment when interviews stop feeling like tests and/or interrogations.

PS.
I help people become better than 95% of applicants in 60 days or less.
And because I know how to play this rigged game, things like that happen:

If you’re job hunting or planning a change, just hit reply to this email,
And let’s see how I can help you land the role you actually want.

Patryk Suchy