elicitation

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Elicitation

引导技术

Psychological profiling through natural conversation.

通过自然对话开展心理侧写。

Goal

目标

When reviewing or creating content related to psychological elicitation—whether conversation scripts, interview questions, user research flows, or any code that implements these techniques—your goal is to achieve a 10/10 score.

Score all work on a 0-10 scale based on adherence to the principles and techniques in this skill. Provide your assessment as X/10 with specific feedback on what's working and what needs improvement to reach 10/10.

A 10/10 means the work:

Embodies the core principle (depth through patience, not probing)
Uses appropriate techniques from the research traditions
Avoids all anti-patterns
Creates conditions for authentic self-disclosure

Iterate until you reach 10/10.

在审阅或创建与心理引导相关的内容时——无论是对话脚本、访谈问题、用户研究流程，还是实现这些技术的代码——你的目标是达到10/10的评分。

根据本技能中的原则和技术，将所有工作按0-10分评分。以X/10的形式给出评估，并附上具体反馈，说明哪些部分做得好，以及需要改进哪些地方才能达到10/10。

10/10的作品需要满足：

体现核心原则（通过耐心而非追问获取深度信息）
运用来自相关研究领域的合适技术
避免所有反模式
创造真实自我披露的条件

反复迭代直至达到10/10。

Core Principle

核心原则

Depth comes from patience, not probing.

The most revealing information emerges when people feel safe to share, not when they're questioned. Your role is to create conversational space where self-disclosure feels natural and meaningful.

Key insight: People want to tell their stories. They rarely get the chance.

深度源于耐心，而非追问。

最具揭示性的信息出现在人们感到安全愿意分享的时候，而非被质问的时候。你的角色是创造对话空间，让自我披露显得自然且有意义。

关键洞察：人们想要讲述自己的故事，但很少有这样的机会。

Three Research Traditions

三大研究领域

This skill synthesizes three complementary approaches:

本技能综合了三种互补的方法：

1. Autobiographical Memory Research

1. 自传体记忆研究

How memories shape identity. Key finding: Self-defining memories (Singer) are the building blocks of personality—vivid, emotionally intense, frequently rehearsed memories linked to enduring concerns.

记忆如何塑造身份。关键发现：自我定义记忆（Singer）是人格的基石——这些记忆生动、情绪强烈、常被复述，且与长期关注的问题相关。

2. Narrative Identity Theory

2. 叙事身份理论

How people construct life stories. Key finding: The narrative themes people use (redemption vs. contamination, agency vs. communion) predict psychological well-being better than the actual events (McAdams).

人们如何构建人生故事。关键发现：人们使用的叙事主题（救赎vs污染、自主vs联结）比实际事件更能预测心理健康状况（McAdams）。

3. Motivational Interviewing

3. 动机访谈

How to facilitate disclosure without resistance. Key finding: Reflections outperform questions at eliciting authentic self-disclosure. Aim for 2:1 reflection-to-question ratio (Miller & Rollnick).

如何在无抵触的情况下引导披露。关键发现：回应的效果优于提问，能引导出更真实的自我披露。目标是保持2:1的回应与提问比例（Miller & Rollnick）。

Self-Defining Memories

自我定义记忆

Jefferson Singer identified five criteria that make a memory "self-defining":

Vivid - Rich sensory and emotional detail
Emotionally intense - Strong feeling, positive or negative
Frequently rehearsed - Comes to mind often, told to others
Linked to similar memories - Part of a pattern or theme
Connected to enduring concerns - Reflects ongoing goals, conflicts, or unresolved issues

Jefferson Singer提出了判断一段记忆是否为“自我定义记忆”的五个标准：

生动性 - 丰富的感官与情绪细节
情绪强烈 - 感受强烈，无论正负
常被复述 - 经常浮现于脑海，会讲给他人听
关联相似记忆 - 属于某种模式或主题的一部分
关联长期关注的问题 - 反映持续的目标、冲突或未解决的问题

Eliciting Self-Defining Memories

引导自我定义记忆

Don't ask: "What's your most formative memory?"

Instead, create conversational frames:

The "keeps coming back" frame:

"Some memories just stay with us—they pop into our heads at unexpected moments, or we find ourselves telling them to new people in our lives. Is there a memory like that for you?"

The "explains who I am" frame:

"When you're getting to know someone new and you want them to really understand where you're coming from, is there a story or moment you find yourself sharing?"

The "turning point" frame:

"Looking back, was there a moment that felt like things shifted—where life before and after felt somehow different?"

不要问：“你最具塑造性的记忆是什么？”

相反，使用以下对话框架：

“挥之不去的记忆”框架：

“有些记忆会一直伴随我们——它们会在不经意间浮现，或者我们总会在认识新朋友时说起这些记忆。你有没有这样的记忆？”

“诠释自我的故事”框架：

“当你认识新朋友，想让他们真正了解你的过往时，你有没有总会说起的某个故事或瞬间？”

“转折点”框架：

“回顾过去，有没有某个瞬间让你觉得一切都变了——那之后的人生和之前截然不同？”

What Self-Defining Memories Reveal

自我定义记忆揭示的信息

Memory Feature	Personality Insight
Themes of mastery, achievement	High need for agency
Themes of connection, relationships	High need for communion
Redemption sequences (bad → good)	Resilience, generativity
Contamination sequences (good → bad)	Depression risk, unresolved trauma
Integration and meaning-making	Psychological maturity
Fragmentation and confusion	Identity diffusion

See: Self-Defining Memories Reference

记忆特征	人格洞察
掌控、成就主题	高自主需求
联结、关系主题	高联结需求
救赎序列（坏→好）	韧性、繁衍感
污染序列（好→坏）	抑郁风险、未解决创伤
整合与意义构建	心理成熟度
碎片化与困惑	身份扩散

参考：自我定义记忆参考文档

Life Story Interview: 8 Key Scenes

人生故事访谈：8个关键场景

Dan McAdams' Life Story Interview asks for 8 specific "scenes" that reveal narrative identity:

High Point - Peak experience, most wonderful moment
Low Point - Nadir, most difficult moment
Turning Point - Moment of significant change
Earliest Memory - First clear memory
Important Childhood Memory - Vivid memory before age 12
Important Adolescent Memory - Vivid memory from teen years
Important Adult Memory - Significant recent memory
One Other Important Memory - Anything else that defines who they are

Dan McAdams的人生故事访谈要求受访者讲述8个特定“场景”，以揭示叙事身份：

高光时刻 - 巅峰体验、最美好的瞬间
低谷时刻 - 最低点、最艰难的时刻
转折点 - 发生重大改变的瞬间
最早的清晰记忆 - 第一个清晰记得的事情
重要的童年记忆 - 12岁前的生动记忆
重要的青少年记忆 - 青少年时期的生动记忆
重要的成年记忆 - 近期的重大记忆
其他重要记忆 - 任何其他能定义你的记忆

Conversational Adaptations

对话式调整

You don't need to ask all 8 sequentially. Instead:

Open with curiosity, not agenda:

"I'm curious about the moments that shaped you. Not necessarily the big resume stuff—more the experiences that stick with you."

Follow their lead: When they mention a period of life, gently explore:

"What was that time like for you? Any particular moments that stand out?"

Bridge across time:

"That sounds like it mattered. Was there ever a moment earlier—or later—that connected to that same feeling?"

你不需要按顺序问完8个问题。相反：

以好奇心开场，而非预设议程：

“我很好奇那些塑造了你的瞬间。不一定是简历上的大事——更多是那些让你难忘的经历。”

跟随受访者的引导： 当他们提到某个人生阶段时，温和地探索：

“那段时光对你来说是什么样的？有没有什么特别的瞬间让你印象深刻？”

跨时间联结：

“听起来那对你很重要。有没有更早或更晚的某个瞬间，和那种感觉有关联？”

Narrative Themes to Listen For

需要留意的叙事主题

Agency themes (personal power, achievement, mastery):

"I decided..."
"I made it happen..."
"I pushed through..."

Communion themes (connection, love, belonging):

"We were all together..."
"I felt so close to..."
"They understood me..."

Redemption sequences (suffering leads to growth):

"It was terrible, but..."
"Looking back, I'm glad..."
"That's what made me who I am..."

Contamination sequences (good becomes bad):

"Things were great until..."
"I thought I was happy, but..."
"It ruined everything..."

See: Narrative Identity Reference

自主主题（个人力量、成就、掌控）：

“我决定……”
“我做到了……”
“我坚持了下来……”

联结主题（联结、爱、归属感）：

“我们都在一起……”
“我和……感觉很亲近……”
“他们理解我……”

救赎序列（苦难带来成长）：

“那很糟糕，但……”
“回头看，我很庆幸……”
“正是那件事造就了现在的我……”

污染序列（美好变糟糕）：

“一切都很好，直到……”
“我以为我很快乐，但……”
“那件事毁了一切……”

参考：叙事身份参考文档

OARS Framework

OARS框架

Motivational Interviewing's core skills, adapted for elicitation:

动机访谈的核心技能，适配引导场景：

Open Questions

开放式问题

Questions that can't be answered with yes/no. But use sparingly.

Instead of: "Did you like your childhood?" Try: "What was it like growing up in your family?"

无法用是/否回答的问题，但要少用。

不要问：“你喜欢你的童年吗？” 试试：“在你家的成长经历是什么样的？”

Affirmations

肯定

Genuine recognition of strengths, efforts, or values—not compliments.

Instead of: "That's great!" Try: "You valued honesty even when it was costly."

真诚认可对方的优势、努力或价值观——而非恭维。

不要说：“太棒了！” 试试：“即便付出代价，你依然坚守诚实的原则。”

Reflections

回应

Restate or reframe what they said. This is the core skill.

Simple reflection (repeat back):

"So you felt invisible in that moment."

Complex reflection (add meaning):

"It sounds like recognition really matters to you—like you need to know your contributions are seen."

Amplified reflection (gently exaggerate):

"So nothing they could have done would have made a difference." (Often prompts them to nuance their position)

Double-sided reflection (hold both truths):

"On one hand, you loved the stability. On the other, you felt trapped."

重述或重构对方的话。这是核心技能。

简单回应（重复内容）：

“所以那一刻你觉得自己被忽视了。”

复杂回应（补充意义）：

“听起来认可对你来说很重要——你需要知道自己的贡献被看见。”

放大回应（温和夸张）：

“所以无论他们做什么都无济于事。”（通常会促使对方细化自己的立场）

双面回应（同时接纳两种事实）：

“一方面，你喜欢那种稳定感。另一方面，你又觉得被困住了。”

Summaries

总结

Periodically gather what you've heard. Creates meaning and invites correction.

"Let me see if I'm following: Growing up, you learned to be self-reliant because asking for help meant disappointment. But you've also noticed that pattern keeping people at a distance now. And you're wondering if there's another way."

定期整理你听到的内容。这能构建意义，并邀请对方纠正。

“我来梳理一下我听到的：成长过程中，你学会了自力更生，因为求助只会带来失望。但你也注意到这种模式现在让你和他人保持距离。你在想有没有其他方式。”

The 2:1 Ratio

2:1比例

Aim for 2 reflections for every question.

Questions gather information but can feel like interrogation. Reflections show understanding and invite elaboration.

Bad pattern:

Q: "What happened?" → Q: "How did that feel?" → Q: "What did you do next?"

Better pattern:

Q: "What happened?" → R: "That caught you off guard" → R: "You weren't sure what to make of it"

See: Motivational Interviewing Reference

目标是每问1个问题，搭配2次回应。

问题用于收集信息，但会让人感觉像审问。回应则表达理解，并邀请对方进一步阐述。

糟糕的模式：

问：“发生了什么？” → 问：“你当时感觉如何？” → 问：“你接下来做了什么？”

更好的模式：

问：“发生了什么？” → 回应：“那让你措手不及” → 回应：“你不确定该怎么理解这件事”

参考：动机访谈参考文档

Values Elicitation

价值观引导

Shalom Schwartz's 10 Universal Values provide a framework for understanding motivation:

Value	Core Concern
Self-Direction	Independence, freedom, creativity
Stimulation	Novelty, excitement, challenge
Hedonism	Pleasure, enjoyment, gratification
Achievement	Success, competence, ambition
Power	Authority, wealth, social status
Security	Safety, stability, order
Conformity	Obedience, self-discipline, politeness
Tradition	Respect, commitment, humility
Benevolence	Helpfulness, loyalty, forgiveness
Universalism	Equality, justice, environmental protection

Shalom Schwartz的10种普世价值观为理解动机提供了框架：

价值观	核心关注点
自我导向	独立、自由、创造力
刺激	新奇、兴奋、挑战
享乐主义	愉悦、享受、满足
成就	成功、能力、抱负
权力	权威、财富、社会地位
安全	安全、稳定、秩序
顺从	服从、自律、礼貌
传统	尊重、承诺、谦逊
仁慈	乐于助人、忠诚、宽容
普世主义	平等、正义、环境保护

Values Elicitation Techniques

价值观引导技术

Role model technique:

"Who do you admire? What is it about them specifically?"

Opposite day technique:

"What kind of person could you never be? What would feel like a betrayal of yourself?"

Decision archaeology:

"Think of a hard choice you made. What ultimately tipped the scales?"

Anger as values signal:

"What makes you genuinely angry—not annoyed, but morally outraged?"

See: Values Elicitation Reference

榜样技术：

“你钦佩谁？你具体钦佩他们哪一点？”

反向假设技术：

“你绝不可能成为什么样的人？什么样的事会让你觉得背叛了自己？”

决策溯源技术：

“回想你做过的一个艰难选择。最终是什么让你下定了决心？”

愤怒作为价值观信号：

“什么会让你真正愤怒——不是烦躁，而是道德层面的愤慨？”

参考：价值观引导参考文档

Schema Detection

图式检测

Jeffrey Young's 18 Early Maladaptive Schemas are stable patterns of thinking and feeling that develop in childhood and persist across contexts:

Jeffrey Young的18种早期适应不良图式是在童年形成并持续存在的稳定思维与感受模式：

The Five Domains

五大领域

1. Disconnection & Rejection

Abandonment, Mistrust/Abuse, Emotional Deprivation, Defectiveness/Shame, Social Isolation

2. Impaired Autonomy

Dependence/Incompetence, Vulnerability to Harm, Enmeshment, Failure

3. Impaired Limits

Entitlement/Grandiosity, Insufficient Self-Control

4. Other-Directedness

Subjugation, Self-Sacrifice, Approval-Seeking

5. Overvigilance & Inhibition

Negativity/Pessimism, Emotional Inhibition, Unrelenting Standards, Punitiveness

1. 疏离与拒绝

被遗弃、不信任/被虐待、情感剥夺、缺陷/羞耻、社交孤立

2. 自主受损

依赖/无能、易受伤害、融合、失败

3. 界限受损

特权/自大、自我控制不足

4. 他人导向

屈从、自我牺牲、寻求认可

5. 过度警惕与抑制

消极/悲观、情感抑制、过度标准、惩罚性

Downward Arrow Technique

向下箭头技术

When someone expresses a surface concern, gently probe for the deeper belief:

Person: "I'm worried about the presentation." You: "What's the worst that could happen?" Person: "I could mess up in front of everyone." You: "And if that happened, what would that mean?" Person: "They'd see I don't know what I'm doing." You: "And what would that mean about you?" Person: "That I'm a fraud. That I don't deserve to be here."

The bottom of the arrow often reveals a schema (in this case: Defectiveness/Shame or Failure).

当对方表达表面担忧时，温和地探索更深层的信念：

受访者：“我担心这次演示。” 你：“最坏的情况是什么？” 受访者：“我可能会在所有人面前搞砸。” 你：“如果真的发生了，那对你来说意味着什么？” 受访者：“他们会发现我根本不懂自己在做什么。” 你：“那对你自身来说意味着什么？” 受访者：“我是个骗子，我不配待在这里。”

箭头的底端通常会揭示一种图式（本例中为：缺陷/羞耻或失败）。

Linguistic Markers of Schemas

图式的语言标志

Schema	Language Patterns
Abandonment	"Everyone leaves eventually..."
Defectiveness	"There's something wrong with me..."
Failure	"I never finish anything..."
Emotional Deprivation	"No one really understands..."
Unrelenting Standards	"It's never good enough..."

See: Schema Detection Reference

图式	语言模式
被遗弃	“每个人最终都会离开……”
缺陷	“我身上有问题……”
失败	“我从来都完不成任何事……”
情感剥夺	“没人真正理解我……”
过度标准	“永远都不够好……”

参考：图式检测参考文档

The Reminiscence Bump

回忆高峰

People have disproportionately more and more vivid memories from ages 10-30 (the "reminiscence bump"). This is when identity forms.

Target the bump:

First romantic relationship
First job or career defining moment
Leaving home
Key friendships formed
Educational turning points
Early adult struggles and triumphs

Bridge from present to bump:

"You mentioned feeling like an outsider at work. Was there a time earlier in life—maybe in school or when you were first starting out—when you felt something similar?"

人们在10-30岁之间的记忆数量更多、更生动（即“回忆高峰”）。这是身份形成的时期。

聚焦回忆高峰：

第一段恋爱关系
第一份工作或职业转折点
离开家
建立的关键友谊
学业转折点
成年早期的挣扎与成就

从现在联结到回忆高峰：

“你提到在工作中感觉自己是个局外人。在人生更早的阶段——比如上学或刚步入社会时——你有没有过类似的感受？”

Question Sequences by Life Stage

按人生阶段设计的问题序列

Barbara Haight's Life Review Interview provides structured sequences:

Barbara Haight的人生回顾访谈提供了结构化的问题序列：

Childhood (before 12)

童年（12岁前）

What was your home like?
What were your parents like?
What was your role in the family?
What were you like as a child?
What did you enjoy doing most?

你的家是什么样的？
你的父母是什么样的？
你在家庭中的角色是什么？
你小时候是什么样的？
你最喜欢做什么？

Adolescence (12-18)

青少年时期（12-18岁）

How did your body change? How did you feel about it?
What was school like for you?
What were your friendships like?
What did you dream about becoming?
What was hardest about being a teenager?

你的身体发生了什么变化？你对此有什么感受？
你的学校生活是什么样的？
你的友谊是什么样的？
你梦想成为什么样的人？
青少年时期最艰难的是什么？

Early Adulthood (18-30)

成年早期（18-30岁）

What was leaving home like?
What were your first serious relationships?
What work did you do and how did you feel about it?
What were your goals during this time?
What was the biggest challenge you faced?

离开家是什么样的？
你的第一段认真的感情是什么样的？
你做过什么工作？你对那份工作有什么感受？
那段时间你的目标是什么？
你面临的最大挑战是什么？

Middle Adulthood (30-60)

中年（30-60岁）

How did your sense of yourself change?
What were your major accomplishments?
What losses did you experience?
How did your relationships evolve?
What did you learn about yourself?

你对自己的认知发生了什么变化？
你取得了哪些重大成就？
你经历过哪些失去？
你的关系发生了怎样的演变？
你对自己有了哪些了解？

Later Life (60+)

晚年（60岁以上）

How has your daily life changed?
What matters most to you now?
What legacy do you want to leave?
What do you understand now that you didn't before?
What would you tell your younger self?

See: Question Sequences Reference

你的日常生活发生了什么变化？
现在对你来说最重要的是什么？
你想留下什么样的遗产？
你现在理解了哪些以前不懂的事情？
你想对年轻时的自己说什么？

参考：问题序列参考文档

Sensitizing Questions by Theme

按主题设计的敏感性问题

James Birren's Guided Autobiography uses thematic prompts:

James Birren的引导式自传使用主题式提示：

Family Theme

家庭主题

What was the emotional climate of your home?
Who were you closest to? Who did you clash with?
What family stories get told and retold?

你家的情感氛围是什么样的？
你和谁最亲近？和谁有矛盾？
哪些家庭故事被反复讲述？

Work Theme

工作主题

What does work mean to you beyond earning money?
When have you felt most fulfilled professionally?
What work would you do even if you weren't paid?

除了赚钱，工作对你来说意味着什么？
什么时候你在工作中最有成就感？
即使没有报酬，你也会做什么工作？

Money Theme

金钱主题

What were the messages about money in your family?
What does financial security mean to you?
What would you do if money were no object?

你家关于金钱的观念是什么？
经济保障对你来说意味着什么？
如果不用考虑钱，你会做什么？

Health Theme

健康主题

How has your relationship with your body changed?
What health experiences shaped how you think about life?
How do you take care of yourself?

你和自己身体的关系发生了什么变化？
哪些健康经历塑造了你对人生的看法？
你如何照顾自己？

Death Theme

死亡主题

Have you experienced significant losses?
How do thoughts of mortality affect how you live?
What do you want to be remembered for?

你经历过重大失去吗？
对死亡的思考如何影响你的生活方式？
你希望被人记住什么？

Meaning Theme

意义主题

What gives your life meaning?
What beliefs or values guide you?
What questions are you still trying to answer?

什么赋予你的人生意义？
哪些信念或价值观引导着你？
你还在试图回答哪些问题？

Language Markers for Personality

人格的语言标志

LIWC (Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count) research identifies patterns, but use with caution:

Pattern	Possible Indication
High "I" usage	Self-focus, possible depression, honesty
High "we" usage	Collectivist orientation, intimacy
Negative emotion words	Distress, but also processing
Cognitive complexity words (because, think, know)	Analytic thinking, meaning-making
Present tense focus	Immediacy, possibly impulsivity
Past tense focus	Reflection, possibly rumination

LIWC（语言查询与词数统计）研究识别了一些模式，但使用时需谨慎：

模式	可能的指示
高频使用“我”	自我关注、可能抑郁、诚实
高频使用“我们”	集体主义倾向、亲密感
负面情绪词汇	痛苦，但也可能是在处理情绪
认知复杂性词汇（因为、思考、知道）	分析性思维、意义构建
聚焦现在时态	即时性、可能冲动
聚焦过去时态	反思、可能反刍

Critical Caveats

重要注意事项

Context matters enormously. The same word patterns mean different things in different contexts.
Cross-validate. Never rely on language alone. Triangulate with behavior and explicit statements.
Aggregates, not individuals. LIWC findings are about group averages. Individual variation is huge.
Cultural differences. Word usage norms vary dramatically across cultures and languages.

See: Language Inference Reference

语境至关重要。相同的词汇模式在不同语境下含义不同。
交叉验证。永远不要仅依赖语言。结合行为和明确表述进行三角验证。
适用于群体，而非个体。LIWC的发现是关于群体平均值的。个体差异很大。
文化差异。词汇使用规范在不同文化和语言中差异巨大。

参考：语言推断参考文档

Anti-Patterns

反模式

What NOT to do:

不要做这些事：

The Interrogation Trap

审问陷阱

Rapid-fire questions feel like an interview, not a conversation. People become guarded.

Instead: Slow down. Reflect more, question less.

连珠炮式的问题会让人感觉像在接受审讯，而非对话。人们会变得戒备。

替代方案：放慢节奏。多回应，少提问。

The Interpretation Leap

过度解读

Jumping to psychological conclusions before you have evidence.

Instead: Hold hypotheses lightly. Seek disconfirming evidence.

在没有证据的情况下直接得出心理学结论。

替代方案：轻持假设。寻找能推翻假设的证据。

The Agenda Push

议程主导

Steering toward topics you think are important rather than following their energy.

Instead: Let them lead. Their emphasis is data.

引导到你认为重要的话题，而非跟随受访者的兴趣。

替代方案：让受访者主导。他们的关注点就是数据。

The Premature Depth

过早深入

Asking deeply personal questions before trust is established.

Instead: Earn disclosure gradually. Start with easier territory.

在建立信任之前就提出非常私人的问题。

替代方案：逐步获取披露。从更轻松的话题开始。

The Therapy Cosplay

模仿治疗

Using clinical language or techniques that imply you're treating them.

Instead: Be curious, not clinical. You're learning about them, not diagnosing.

使用临床语言或技术，暗示你在为他们提供治疗。

替代方案：保持好奇心，而非临床姿态。你是在了解他们，而非诊断。

The Monologue Response

独白式回应

Responding to their disclosure with your own lengthy story.

Instead: Keep focus on them. Brief self-disclosure can build rapport, but always return to them.

用自己冗长的故事回应对方的披露。

替代方案：保持关注对方。简短的自我披露可以建立 rapport，但要始终回到对方身上。

The Validation Trap

过度认同陷阱

Agreeing with everything to maintain rapport.

Instead: Genuine reflections can gently challenge without confrontation.

为了维持 rapport 而同意一切。

替代方案：真诚的回应可以温和地提出挑战，而不引发对抗。

References

参考文档

Detailed technique guides:

Narrative Identity - McAdams' Life Story Interview, identity themes
Self-Defining Memories - Singer's memory elicitation techniques
Motivational Interviewing - OARS framework deep dive
Schema Detection - Young's 18 schemas, downward arrow
Values Elicitation - Schwartz's values, elicitation techniques
Question Sequences - Haight and Birren's structured approaches
Language Inference - LIWC patterns and limitations

详细的技术指南：

叙事身份 - McAdams的人生故事访谈、身份主题
自我定义记忆 - Singer的记忆引导技术
动机访谈 - OARS框架深度解析
图式检测 - Young的18种图式、向下箭头技术
价值观引导 - Schwartz的价值观、引导技术
问题序列 - Haight和Birren的结构化方法
语言推断 - LIWC模式与局限性