More Than Words: An Integrative Review of Innovative Elicitation Techniques for Qualitative Interviews

IntroductionInterviews are central to many qualitative studies in health professions education (HPE). However, researchers often rely only on oral questioning despite the existence of techniques tailored to elicit the rich data needed to address complex problems and meaningfully engage participants. Elicitation techniques are strategies - e.g. participant photography, neighbourhood walks - used to generate rich conversations, but guidance on these techniques is scattered across literatures from diverse fields. In this synthesis, we offer an overview of the elicitation techniques available and advice about how to choose between them. MethodsWe conducted an integrative review, drawing on methodological literature from across the health and social sciences. Our interdisciplinary searches yielded 3056 citations. We included 293 citations that were methodologically focused and discussed elicitation techniques used in interviews with adults. We then extracted specific elicitation techniques, summarizing each technique to capture key features, as well as strengths and weaknesses. From this, we developed a framework to help researchers identify challenges in their interview-based research, and to select elicitation techniques that address their challenges. ResultsElicitation techniques serve two main purposes: they can enrich data and engage participants in new ways. To enrich data, researchers might seek to shift conversations away from participants entrenched narratives, to externalize conversations on sensitive topics, or to elicit affect, tacit knowledge, or contextual details. When engaging participants in new ways, researchers might seek to increase equity between the researcher and participant or interview accessibility across diverse participant populations. DiscussionWhen chosen with study goals in mind, elicitation techniques can enrich interview data. To harness this potential, we need to re-conceptualize interviews as co-production of knowledge by researcher(s) and participant(s). To make interviews more accessible, we need to consider flexibility so that each participant can engage in ways that best suit their needs and preferences.