Which statement about unstructured interviews holds true?

Unstructured interviews are characterized by their flexibility and adaptability, allowing the interviewer to explore topics in-depth based on the participant's responses. When multiple interviewers are involved, the validity of the results can increase. This is because different interviewers can provide a broader perspective on the candidates and reduce bias that may arise from a single interviewer's subjective interpretation.

The involvement of various interviewers helps to mitigate individual biases and allows for a more balanced assessment of the interviewee's responses. Additionally, having multiple perspectives can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of the interviewee's qualifications and fit within the organization. This collaborative approach can enhance the overall validity of the findings derived from unstructured interviews, making it a crucial advantage of this method.

In contrast, the other options present characteristics that do not align with the essence of unstructured interviews. For instance, unstructured interviews do not follow a strict question script, which contradicts the nature of option C, and they typically involve more nuanced and subjective analysis, making them harder to analyze efficiently as indicated in option A. While unstructured interviews can sometimes be less expensive in certain contexts, this is not universally true and depends largely on the specific circumstances and the nature of the research, making option D less reliable.