Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Communication Error Management in Law Enforceme...

Electronic data

  • Error_management_Error_sender_submission_4_def

    Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Criminal Justice and Behavior, ? (?), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Criminal Justice and Behavior page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/CJB on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/

    Accepted author manuscript, 425 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

  • AcceptanceLetter

    Other version, 119 KB, PDF document

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Communication Error Management in Law Enforcement Interactions: A Sender’s Perspective

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

E-pub ahead of print
Close
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>27/08/2019
<mark>Journal</mark>Criminal Justice and Behavior
Number of pages22
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print
Early online date27/08/19
Original languageEnglish

Abstract

We examined the psychological and behavioral consequences of making a communication error in expressive crisis negotiations and instrumental suspect interviews. During crisis negotiation (n = 133) or suspect interview (n = 68) training, Dutch police and probation officers received preparation material that led them to make a factual, judgment, or no error. Across both studies, errors increased officers’ negative affect, with errors leading to more stress in crisis negotiations and more distraction in suspect interviews. When comparing factual with judgment errors, factual errors led to more distraction in crisis negotiations and more negative affect in suspect interviews. Analysis of the transcribed dialogues identified four categories of response: apologize, exploration, deflect, and no alignment. Of these, negotiators used all four regularly, whereas interviewers predominantly used exploration and deflect. Our findings revealed the potentially negative effects of errors on officers and offered insights into how they could best focus to induce an appropriate response.

Bibliographic note

The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Criminal Justice and Behavior, ? (?), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Criminal Justice and Behavior page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/CJB on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/