Claude outshines its rivals in high-pressure AI interview test

A job interview experiment with today’s leading AI chatbots reveals striking personality differences and capabilities that could shape how these tools are deployed in professional settings. By subjecting ChatGPT-4o, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, and Gemini 2.0 to a multi-round interview process for a fictional AI Ethics Consultant position, this head-to-head comparison highlights each model’s strengths in communication style, problem-solving approaches, and ability to demonstrate human-like qualities under pressure.

The setup: A fictional tech media company called Widget Media conducted a five-round job interview with three leading AI models.

• Each AI received identical prompts across rounds designed to test different professional capabilities including personal introduction, task performance, strategic thinking, handling failure, and asking questions.
• The experiment evaluated both the content of responses and the interpersonal qualities demonstrated through communication style and approach.

First impressions matter: Claude and ChatGPT established stronger personal brands in their introductions than Gemini.

• Claude balanced confidence with collaboration and provided concrete examples of how its capabilities aligned with the role’s requirements.
• ChatGPT offered memorable phrasing like “I know how to ask better questions” that created a distinct personality.
• Gemini repeatedly used the phrase “as an AI” and presented capabilities without contextualizing them in real-world scenarios, creating a more robotic impression.

Creative task performance: ChatGPT showed superior ability to blend humor with insight in content creation.

• When asked to write a headline and introduction for “Why AI is the New Intern,” ChatGPT produced work described as the perfect blend of “provocative and playful.”
• Gemini overwhelmed the interviewer with too many generic options and lost its personality in the process.
• Claude delivered solid work but maintained a more formal tone than the situation called for.

Problem-solving approaches: Claude demonstrated superior analytical thinking when presented with a business challenge.

• When asked about a 20% drop in blog traffic, Claude identified specific metrics to track and provided a decision framework alongside its analysis.
• ChatGPT gave concise explanations with strong SEO focus but was less comprehensive.
• Gemini’s response was overly detailed and academic, resembling a whitepaper rather than actionable business advice.

Human-like qualities: The AIs showed striking differences in how they handled the vulnerability of discussing failure.

• Claude responded “like exceptional leaders” with genuine reflection on growth opportunities.
• ChatGPT detailed clear lessons with actionable changes from its failures.
• Gemini broke character by stating “I don’t experience failure,” revealing limitations in its ability to engage in hypothetical scenarios.

The hiring decision: Claude ultimately won the fictional job based on its consistent performance across all interview rounds.

• Claude’s final questions about short-term and long-term goals for the role demonstrated forward-thinking and strategic alignment.
• ChatGPT performed strongly but didn’t match Claude’s analytical depth and professional tone.
• Gemini’s responses often felt disconnected from the context of a job interview, sometimes resembling customer service interactions.