When words fail us: An integrative review of innovative elicitation techniques for qualitative interviews

Interviews are central to many qualitative studies in health professions education (HPE). However, researchers often struggle to elicit rich data and engage diverse participants who may find this strategy exclusionary. Elicitation techniques are strategies tailored to address these challenges, enhancing oral conversations through other forms of interaction-for example, participant photography and neighbourhood walks. These strategies are tailored to elicit the rich data needed to address complex problems and meaningfully engage participants. Unfortunately, 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. We 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, summarising 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. To enrich data, researchers might seek to shift conversations away from participants' entrenched narratives, to externalise conversations on sensitive topics, or to elicit affect, tacit knowledge or contextual details. When empowering participants, researchers might seek to increase equity between the researcher and participant or foster interview accessibility across diverse participant populations. When chosen with study goals in mind, elicitation techniques can enrich interview data. To harness this potential, we need to re-conceptualise interviews as co-production of knowledge by researcher(s) and participant(s). To make interviews more equitable and accessible, we need to consider flexibility so that each participant can engage in ways that best suit their needs and preferences.