Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations

Research

Associated organisational units

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations: Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations: Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences. / Giebels, Ellen; Taylor, Paul J.
In: Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 94, No. 1, 01.2009, p. 5-19.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Giebels, E & Taylor, PJ 2009, 'Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations: Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences', Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 5-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012953

APA

Giebels, E., & Taylor, P. J. (2009). Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations: Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(1), 5-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012953

Vancouver

Giebels E, Taylor PJ. Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations: Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009 Jan;94(1):5-19. doi: 10.1037/a0012953

Author

Giebels, Ellen ; Taylor, Paul J. / Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations : Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences. In: Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009 ; Vol. 94, No. 1. pp. 5-19.

Bibtex

@article{328494dcbfef42e6b1577b3b920fb7cb,
title = "Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations: Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences",
abstract = "This research examines cultural differences in negotiators' responses to persuasive arguments in crisis (hostage) negotiations over time. Using a new method of examining cue-response patterns, the authors examined 25 crisis negotiations in which police negotiators interacted with perpetrators front low-context (LC) or high-context (HC) cultures. Compared with HC perpetrators. LC perpetrators were found to use more persuasive arguments, to reciprocate persuasive arguments in the second half of negotiations. and to respond to persuasive arguments in a compromising way. Further analyses found that LC perpetrators were more likely to communicate threats, especially in the first half of the negotiations. but that HC perpetrators were more likely to reciprocate them. The implications of these findings for our under of intercultural interaction are discussed.",
keywords = "hostage negotiation, cultural differences, influence tactics, proximity coefficient, RANK-BISERIAL CORRELATION, MARKOV-CHAIN ANALYSIS, COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR, UNITED-STATES, INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION, SOCIAL MOTIVES, EXIT OPTIONS, CONFLICT, SEQUENCES, JAPANESE",
author = "Ellen Giebels and Taylor, {Paul J.}",
year = "2009",
month = jan,
doi = "10.1037/a0012953",
language = "English",
volume = "94",
pages = "5--19",
journal = "Journal of Applied Psychology",
issn = "0021-9010",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations

T2 - Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences

AU - Giebels, Ellen

AU - Taylor, Paul J.

PY - 2009/1

Y1 - 2009/1

N2 - This research examines cultural differences in negotiators' responses to persuasive arguments in crisis (hostage) negotiations over time. Using a new method of examining cue-response patterns, the authors examined 25 crisis negotiations in which police negotiators interacted with perpetrators front low-context (LC) or high-context (HC) cultures. Compared with HC perpetrators. LC perpetrators were found to use more persuasive arguments, to reciprocate persuasive arguments in the second half of negotiations. and to respond to persuasive arguments in a compromising way. Further analyses found that LC perpetrators were more likely to communicate threats, especially in the first half of the negotiations. but that HC perpetrators were more likely to reciprocate them. The implications of these findings for our under of intercultural interaction are discussed.

AB - This research examines cultural differences in negotiators' responses to persuasive arguments in crisis (hostage) negotiations over time. Using a new method of examining cue-response patterns, the authors examined 25 crisis negotiations in which police negotiators interacted with perpetrators front low-context (LC) or high-context (HC) cultures. Compared with HC perpetrators. LC perpetrators were found to use more persuasive arguments, to reciprocate persuasive arguments in the second half of negotiations. and to respond to persuasive arguments in a compromising way. Further analyses found that LC perpetrators were more likely to communicate threats, especially in the first half of the negotiations. but that HC perpetrators were more likely to reciprocate them. The implications of these findings for our under of intercultural interaction are discussed.

KW - hostage negotiation

KW - cultural differences

KW - influence tactics

KW - proximity coefficient

KW - RANK-BISERIAL CORRELATION

KW - MARKOV-CHAIN ANALYSIS

KW - COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR

KW - UNITED-STATES

KW - INTEGRATIVE NEGOTIATION

KW - SOCIAL MOTIVES

KW - EXIT OPTIONS

KW - CONFLICT

KW - SEQUENCES

KW - JAPANESE

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=60349115059&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/a0012953

DO - 10.1037/a0012953

M3 - Journal article

VL - 94

SP - 5

EP - 19

JO - Journal of Applied Psychology

JF - Journal of Applied Psychology

SN - 0021-9010

IS - 1

ER -