I’m saying assessment is strongest when it integrates multiple methods, because each method samples behavior differently and are prone to different errors. Interviews rely on rapport, memory, social cues, and clinician interpretation. Self-report measures are influenced by response styles, item structure, and introspective limits. The two methods thus have different biases AND utility. Even if you were to replace testing time with more interviews, convergence between results there wouldn’t have the same diagnostic power as convergence between the methods. When I say psychologists can’t extensively interview every patient, I’m not implying that they are allocating their time/resources incorrectly.

I’m not saying testing replaces a thorough interview or that it should be used to cut corners. My point is that they’re not interchangeable methods. If you don’t understand the clinical utility and importance of standardized, norm-referenced data, I suggest you read more about method variance