Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law

visible tactical containment combined with the

third component, the presentation of face-saving

issues, becomes the most integral component of the

negotiation process. The process of negotiation and

active listening assumes that the interchange among

individuals even within a crisis situation possesses

rewards and costs for both factions. The goal is to

maximize mutual benefits while concurrently mini-

mizing costs—an interaction in which the lead nego-

tiator emphasizes a process of quid pro quo

(something for something). Face-saving techniques

allow both law enforcement and the subjects to main-

tain some semblance of control while agreeing on

options of mutual gain. For example, a barricaded

subject may have agreed to resolve the crisis by meet-

ing the tactical officers outside his home, but the

media have positioned their cameras where he will

easily be videotaped being taken into custody. A face-

saving negotiation is for both the TOC personnel and

the subject to agree that he or she will be taken into

custody at the back of his or her home to avoid

the humiliation of his or her arrest being filmed by

the local media.

Active Listening and

the Resolution Process

The successful negotiator is highly skilled in active

listening, the ability to focus on what the subject is

speaking and to accurately process not only what the

subject is saying but also the accurate emotional con-

tent that is actually being communicated. In other

words, active listening is a technique to maximize an

empathic exchange between the negotiator and the

subject. There are 14 identified communications tech-

niques within the active listening process. Experience

has established that the most effective techniques are

those of clarification and paraphrasing, primary-level

empathy, and especially self-disclosure. Clarification

and paraphrasing are most typically used during the

initial contacts with the subject so that during these

more emotionally laden contacts, the likelihood of

miscommunication and misunderstanding is mini-

mized. For example,

Negotiator: By “old lady,” do you mean your wife?

Subject: Yeah, that’s right, her.

Negotiator: So, it sounds like things have been going

very badly between you two today.

Now, over time, the negotiator will begin to insert

primary-level empathy and self-disclosure:

Negotiator: Boy, it sure sounds like everything appears

to be falling apart, and you’re pretty angry

and scared.

Subject: Yeah, but you really don’t know what it’s

like for me now!

Negotiator: Maybe, maybe not, but I know that I was

feeling really hurt and scared when I was

going through my divorce a few years ago.

The relatively long process of establishing an

empathic rapport between the lead negotiator and the

subject is known as the “hook.” The hook is the point

at which the negotiator has established a position of

trust with the subject and is now able to lead the sub-

ject through the concrete process of either releasing

hostages and/or being taken into custody. In all situa-

tions, once the subject is taken into custody by the

SWAT team, the individual is arrested and taken to jail

or, in the case of a crisis situation (suicidal subject), he

or she is transported to the nearest crisis response unit.

The negotiation process for hostage and barricade

incidents is the responsibility of highly trained and expe-

rienced SWAT teams. Communication, a clearly articu-

lated and flexible plan, creativity, and patience are the

key components predictive of a successful outcome. The

negotiator’s application of active listening skills and the

demonstration of empathic communication are critical

skills for the successful resolution of critical incidents.

Scott W. Allen

See also Critical Incidents; Police Psychologists; Police

Psychology

Further Readings

Allen, S. W. (1991). Assessment of personality characteristics

related successful hostage negotiators and their resistance

to post-traumatic stress disorder.In J. T. Reese, J. M.

Horn, & C. Dunning (Eds.),Critical incidents in policing

(Rev. ed., pp. 1–16). Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of

Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Butler, W. M., Leitenberg, H., & Fuselier, G. D. (1993). The

use of mental health professional consultants to police

hostage negotiation teams. Behavioral Sciences and the

Law, 11 , 213–221.

170 ———Crisis and Hostage Negotiation

C-Cutler (Encyc)-45463.qxd 11/18/2007 12:41 PM Page 170