Increasing attention is being given to the psychometric adequacy of recently published structured child interviews. Three published child interviews, The Child Assessment Schedule (CAS), The Diagnostic Interview for Children and Adolescents (DICA), and The Interview Schedule for Children (ISC) were evaluated in terms of the available evidence of their validity. Four types of validity were examined: content validity; criterion-related validities; concurrent and predictive validity; and construct validity. A major obstacle to validity investigations has been the absence of a widely agreed upon criterion which is truly more valid than the interview itself. This issue has been dealt with by studying known groups, by comparing the degree of association between interview scores and other measures of psychopathology, and agreement between child and parent on interview. All three interviews were judged to show reasonable evidence of content validity, although there are more questions regarding the DICA. The most common validity investigation has been of concurrent validity. The few studies of the ISC and CAS have found adequate validity. Studies of the DICA are of poor quality and have produced disappointing results. The predictive or construct validities of these interviews are virtually uninvestigated. The preliminary studies are encouraging but are of insufficient quantity to definitively judge their validity. (Author)