Supporters of neutral locations for interviews believe that it does which of the following?

Choosing neutral locations for interviews is believed to keep interruptions to a minimum, which is crucial for creating a conducive environment for discussion. Neutral settings typically reduce the likelihood of participants being interrupted by external factors that might occur in a familiar or more controlled environment, such as an office. In a neutral setting, participants are less likely to be distracted by surroundings that are closely associated with their daily work life or personal issues, allowing them to focus more fully on the interview process. This can lead to more productive interviews, where participants feel at ease to share relevant information without the pressures or distractions that might accompany a location tied to their usual activities.

The other options do not support the rationale behind why neutral locations are preferred. For instance, encouraging distractions goes against the intention of maintaining focus during an interview, while facilitating group interactions isn't typically a focus of individual interviews. Additionally, limiting accessibility contradicts the idea of ensuring that all participants can comfortably engage in the interview process.