Seventh - After reading some of your posts on the official acceptances thread, I must say that you're not the only bitter one here! From my own experience with this admissions process, I've gotten pretty angry with the interview process because it doesn't seem to add anything tangible to one's application. At one of my schools, I interviewed with at least 10 people, most of whom asked me one of two things - "tell me about your research experience" and "what questions do you have about the program/school/my research, etc." (with an occasional "why do you want to come here?"). Some of the profs clearly didn't read my application, and I felt pressured to come up with as many questions as possible on the spot so as not to make myself appear uninterested. As much as I enjoy discussing science and medicine with professionals, the interview process needs to be a bit more of a distinguishing factor - especially when the school doesn't pay for transportation.
The primary element of the interview/application process that has me disgruntled is the misleading recruitment speeches. At one school's interview weekend, I only met with a few profs (not more than 4, if I remember correctly), one of whom spent the entire half-hour trying to convince me to attend the school. Well a few months later, I was met with the notorious thin envelope. (And I was very interested in the school).
Much worse, however, were the misleading comments by my top-choice school's director. For the last three summers, I had conducted research in an immunology lab at this school (first as a volunteer, then as an intern and finally as a Howard Hughes fellow) with a well-known prof. In the second summer, I met with the MSTP director to get some info on the program. After talking to him and having conducted research at the school, it was clearly my top choice. The following summer (2005), when I was ready to apply, I met with him again, went over my stats and reasons for wanting to come to the school. He even offered me an interview with the committee before the end of the summer before going back for my senior year. Unfortunately, as August came around, they weren't able to collect enough committee members and I hadn't completed my application. We agreed to meet in December. I essentially delayed all other secondary apps to work on this one - get it perfect - and I submitted in early October. Well, along came December.. and a rejection e-mail (not even an interview). Of course, I was furious.. after three summers in the same lab at the same school (after the second summer, I actually wanted to switch to a neuro lab but decided to stay to get a better letter from the immuno prof - the point was to get into the MSTP) and after a practical guarantee (or so I thought) for an interview, I was rejected. (To this day, he still hasn't responded to my phone calls or e-mails)
So... the point? Well, stories like these are testaments to the fact that there are only a few spots in each program and many applicants for those spots. Indeed, I'm convinced that there is a random element to the application process. In fact, I just got waitlisted at a school I thought I had no chance at, despite several other unexpected thin envelopes.
Although, now that I think about it, I think I did quite well at their interview. One of my interviewers - who is known to be a bit of a jerk - gave me a challenging pop quiz (with regard to his wife's research project) that I handled quite well. I have to say that although I was nervous in that interview, it probably helped me a lot.. I just hope a spot opens up!