Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47 (1), 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
Other version, 120 KB, PDF document
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Communication Error Management in Law Enforcement Interactions
T2 - A Sender’s Perspective
AU - Oostinga, Miriam
AU - Giebels, Ellen
AU - Taylor, Paul
N1 - The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47 (1), 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/
PY - 2020/1/1
Y1 - 2020/1/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - communication errors
KW - response strategies
KW - error management
KW - suspect interview
KW - crisis negotiation
U2 - 10.1177/0093854819870856
DO - 10.1177/0093854819870856
M3 - Journal article
VL - 47
SP - 39
EP - 60
JO - Criminal Justice and Behavior
JF - Criminal Justice and Behavior
SN - 0093-8548
IS - 1
ER -