One of the most important themes in hostage negotiation is
building a relationship with the suspect.
building a relationship with the suspect.
Two-Dimensional Communication Model
of Schlossberg and Boltz, 1979
The Two-Dimensional Communication Model was the first model that identified specific verbal communication behaviors (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). This model splits those verbal behaviors into instrumental, or behaviors intended to create action moving towards a specific goal; and expressive, or behaviors that identify one's emotional state (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Schlossberg and Boltz found that the use of instrumental and expressive communication could develop a relationship between the negotiator and suspect allowing for the peaceful resolution of conflict in hostage situations (Madrigal, et. al, 2009).
Student-Teacher Interaction Model
of Fowler, Devivo, and Fowler, 1985
The Student-Teacher Interaction Model applied the Flanders Interaction Analysis System (FIAS), a system used to analyze student-teacher interaction, to hostage negotiation settings (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). FIAS observed and coded the verbal behavior of student-teacher interaction into three categories of communication: acceptance, praise, and scolding (Amidon & Flanders, 1967). These behaviors stress the importance of relationship building and trust in student-teacher relationships (Amidon & Flanders, 1967). Fowler, Devivo, and Fowler applied FIAS to hostage situations, acknowledging four specific stages of communication in hostage negotiations: building trust, finessing the suspect to aid in influence, tranquilizing the suspect's unstable emotional state, and reprimanding the suspect (Fowler & Devivo, 2001).
Coercive and Cooperative Relationship Theory
of Donohue, Ramesh, and Borschgrevink, 1991
Donohue, et. al's Coercive and Cooperative Relationship Theory looks into four factors of communication: levels of coercion, cooperation, control, and distance (Madrigal, et. al, 2009).
- Coercive relational partners dominate more than the other
- Cooperative relationships focus on compromise
- Control is characterized by one conversational partner overtaking the conversation
- Distance identifies the level of rapport between two relational partners (Madrigal, et. al, 2009)
Donohue, et. al, found recurring themes in specific types of hostage situations: in domestic disputes, the suspects remained coercive throughout the negotiation; in criminal acts, the suspects transitioned from coercive to cooperative; and in cases involving psychological disorders, the suspects went from cooperation to coercion (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Coercion, Donohue, et. al, found, resulted from increased levels of both distance and control; while cooperation resulted from decreased levels of the same (Madrigal, et. al, 2009).
Negotiated Order Theory
of Donohue and Roberto, 1993
Negotiated Order Theory was created with symbolic interactionism as its basis (Donohue & Roberto, 1993). This theory explores the limits, or boundaries in communication with a focus on the development of interpersonal relationships in hostage situations (Donohue & Roberto, 1993; Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Two boundaries are studied: implicit, or ambiguous boundaries; and explicit, or mutually established boundaries (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Donohue and Roberto identify that bargaining in the negotiation process only happens once the explicit boundaries have been established between the negotiator and the hostage taker (Donohue & Roberto, 1993). With a focus on the relationship between the negotiator and hostage taker specifically, Donohue and Roberto identify a balanced continuum between levels of affiliation, or interpersonal attraction; and interdependence, or willingness between the parties to work with each other (1993; Madrigal, et. al, 2009).
 |
| (Donohue & Roberto, 1993, p. 178) |
Cylindrical Model
of Taylor, 2002
Taylor's Cylindrical Model explores the interconnected workings between interaction, communication style, and intensity of communication (2002). Taylor describes a typical hostage situation as working from avoidance behavior, or failure to interact; to distributive behavior, which is aggressive and selfish; to integrative behavior, which allows for cooperative relationship building (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Within each of these dimensions, a hostage taker uses three styles of communication: instrumental, when working towards a goal; relational, when developing the relationship with a negotiator; and identity, when creating a social mask (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Finally, Taylor measured intensity on each communication style, noting that increased intensity decreases the likelihood of peaceful resolution. (2002).
 |
| (Taylor, 2002, p. 17) |
of Vecchi, Van Hasselt, & Romano, 2004
The Behavioral Change Stairway Model focuses on building a relationship with a hostage taker over time (Vecchi, et. al, 2005). This relationship building occurs over five stages, beginning with active listening, followed by empathy with the hostage taker, leading to rapport between the hostage taker and the negotiator, at which point the negotiator has influence over the hostage taker and can institute behavioral change (Vecchi, et. al, 2005; Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Presuming that all previous stages were successfully completed in adequate time, Vecchi, et. al argues that a negotiator can institute behavioral change in the hostage taker (2005).
 |
| Vecchi, et. al's Behavioral Change Stairway Model uses "skills [that] are virtually identical to those utilized in counseling to establish rapport and positive therapeutic relationships with clients" (2005, p. 542). |
of Kelln & McMurtry, 2007
The Structured Tactical Engagement Process (STEPS) follows a negotiation situation through four distinct steps: pre-contemplation, where the suspect disavows that the situation is out of their control; contemplation, when the suspects recognizes his or her need to work with authorities; preparation, where problem solving occurs between the suspect and the negotiator; and finally action, where plans for surrender become a reality (Kelln & McMurtry, 2007). Kelln and McMurtry recognize the value in knowing the psychological state of the hostage taker, yet STEPS does not itself probe for that information (2007).
4-Phase Model of Hostage Negotiation
of Madrigal, Bowman, & McClain, 2009
The 4-Phase Model of Hostage Negotiation focuses specifically on the behaviors of the negotiator, rather than the hostage taker (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). The four phases involved in this process are establishing initial dialogue, building rapport, influencing, and surrender. Madrigal, et. al recognized that while these appear on the outset to follow a linear progression, the negotiation process may shuffle between phases at numerous times throughout (2009). During establishing initial dialogue, Madrigal, et. al describe a pre-relationship conversation of superficial nature, "includ[ing] such typical safe topics as sports or weather" while allowing for situational dialogue to occur (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Building rapport involves growing and strengthening the relationship between the negotiator and the hostage taker akin to the first three phases of the Behavioral Change Stairway Model (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). The influencing stage is an expansion on the BCSM's acknowledged limitation in the final stages; in this stage, the negotiator manipulates the hostage taker's trust in their relationship to exert influence (Madrigal, et. al, 2009). Finally, in the surrender phase, the logistics of safe surrender are discussed and enacted (Madrigal, et. al, 2009).
