Crisis Hostage Negotiation

Article Summary 

In law enforcement and police psychology, one of the key areas considered as being significant as part of ensuring the safety of citizens is crisis (hostage) negotiation, which has developed significantly within the past few decades. According to Vecchi, Van Hasselt, & Romano (2005), the New York City Police Department (NYCPD) first introduced negotiation strategies in law enforcement in 1973 as part of their response in dealing with a wide array of situations including hostages and kidnappings. Since the introduction of these strategies, police organizations have been on the forefront in providing training to negotiators on problem-solving as part of their approach to dealing with such situations. At the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the need for experienced negotiators created the need for the creation of the FBI Crisis Negotiation Unit (CNU) mandated with the task of engaging in negotiations when faced with situations that may require such skills (Vecchi, Van Hasselt, & Romano, 2005).

Vecchi, Van Hasselt, & Romano (2005) define a crisis as an incident resulting from "conflicts went awry," thus, creating a situation where an individual acts as a barrier or obstacle in achieving desired goals and objectives. For negotiators, it is essential to evaluate the state and stage of a crisis, as this would determine the most effective negotiation strategies and their application in dealing with the problem experienced. The primary goals for the negotiators include establishing some form of communication, as well as, developing a rapport on the situation, buying time during the negotiation process, and defusing any tense emotions arising from the crisis. The negotiator must also have the capability of gathering intelligence that would help in creating a practical approach for law enforcement on how to handle the crisis. Vecchi, Van Hasselt, & Romano (2005) provide readers with an overview of critical theories that negotiators tend to apply as part of their role in the negotiation process especially in ensuring that they deliver positive results.

Opinion on the Article 

After going through the article, the first thought that comes to mind is the extent of research that the authors have utilized as part of their approach towards providing their readers with information. In my opinion, the article creates a rather comprehensive approach to information presentation considering that the authors provide substantive evidence as part of their intentions to ensuring that the information published matches readers' expectations. A review of the title provides readers with an urge to go through this article, as it creates some form of anticipation on what readers ought to expect in the article. Mostly, this is an essential aspect for the researchers, as it helps in building confidence among its readers by elevating their expectations in the article.

Another critical aspect to note from the article is the extensive use of literature or external sources to support ideas presented throughout the article, which also helps in building the credibility of the article. From the first page, it is evident that the researchers have used different sources of information, as they seek to inscribe specific statements gathered from varied sources. In my view, this is not only important in building credibility but also plays a central role in building that level of trust among individual readers. Regarding the idea of information presentation, I would argue that the authors are well organized in their approach to presenting information, as they tend to use a well-structured approach in creating some form of flow. In a score of out of 10, I would rate this article at a 9 when considering all elements associated with creating a compelling research article.

References

Vecchi, G. M., Van Hasselt, V. B., & Romano, S. J. (2005). Crisis (hostage) negotiation: Current strategies and issues in high-risk conflict resolution.  Aggression and Violent Behavior ,  10 (5), 533-551.