Hostage taking Flashcards
Types of hostage taking
Kidnapping for ransom – the taking and holding of someone in an unknown location for the intention of seeking some form of concession, regardless of whether a monetary, political, social (ransom) demand is sought after
Barricade siege – the taking of a building or location that contains individuals for the purpose of demanding some form of concession, whether financial, political, social, or practical (transportation), for the release of the hostages
Hijacking – the taking of a form of transport with the intention of demanding some form of ransom and/or concession for the safe release of the hostages and the vehicle
Is hostage taking Rational ?
The act of kidnapping an individual only to release them on the payment of a ransom is following the law of supply and demand, the perceived reward motivates the effort to commit the crime
The key premise is that during the various stages of the crime that offenders make choices that offset the cost (time effort, risk) against the reward (material or political benefits)
One assumption is that the kidnappers have good knowledge of, and have considered carefully the utility of their decision.
It is possible that other mechanisms, such as social learning (of the success of previous kidnapping) are responsible for the decision
Bounded rationality - decision-making cannot be fully rational because of a number of limits that we face. There may be not enough information, or maybe all possibilities or consequences have not been considered, or there isn’t enough time. The result is that we usually end up making satisficing decisions, rather than optimising decisions. To make decision, we end up using “rules of thumb” or heuristics
Subcultural theory
Direct behavioral observation is an important mechanism of transmition of values and attitudes and social norms between members of a specific group.
Social identification with kidnappers as local leaders can be seen as provoking and reinforcing criminally learned responses (Wolfganf and Ferracuti, 1967).
Subcultural factors account for the modus operandi (MO) of hostage takers, local change (law) causes a change in MO (tactic/target)
Choice structuring is the rational choice to engage in kidnapping as a result of expertise, social support and local knowledge
The successful outcome of kidnapping (collecting ransom and avoiding conviction) is reinforcing.
During the 5 stages of kidnapping (Planning, hostage taking, custody, negotiation and outcome) it is believed that hostage takers act in a highly structured and rational manner
-Does not explain fluctuations in the rate of kidnapping or why only particular individuals are involved in kidnapping. or the development of the activity (choosing new types of victims)
Kidnapping strategy
Hostage taking is a tragic interaction characterised by a temporary relationship between differing parties (police, family, Criminal) in which agreement is critical. In essence the hostage takers and the intended target of the ransom must come to an arrangement to release the hostage and that involves strategic behaviour on both sides
Both sides must anticipate the behaviour of the other side
Bargaining theory suggests that the outcome is a reflection of the process of minimising cost, while maximising outcomes for the protagonists
Games theory suggests that the outcome is reflective of the preferred outcome and knowledge available to the conflicting parties – If it never worked people would stop doing it
There are other factors such as impression management, credibility of the threat, trust and deceit. All of these will influenced strategic behaviour
Script theory
Scripts, are a memory structure that is a schema for understanding and enacting behaviors (Lord and Kernan, 1987).
Crime scripts provide a way of framing behaviours and decision making by providing a context for the offender’s behaviour. They are not that rigid, rather they emerge as a result of learning and adaptions to problems - so offenders can incorporate new sequences
Script and rational choice theories are not mutually exclusive, most researchers argue that hostage taking is rational but is mediated by scripts that define how they kidnappers progress. – Script theory will define the processes, but the decisions made will follow cost-benefit (rational choice)
Kidnappers follow rules for the routine for bargaining and trading for goods, so the utility involves the value of the hostages. They are well treated.
Many hostages taking scenarios do however, involve violence towards the hostages - It is argued that violations of the script justifies the use of violence
In terrorist kidnapping 3 distinct schemata for scripts;
o Group schemata – a pre-existing schema relating to the type and affiliation of the group that manifested behaviour
o Trading schemata – a script for bargaining behaviour of buyers and sellers
o Exogenous schemata – external schemata to the event that could have an influence on the outcome (behaviour of other groups)
Yun and Roth (2008) found that a hostage is more likely to be safely released when the crisis responder engages in negotiation
What are the various negotiation strategies used?
Social exchannge theory is the basis of negotiations with rational actors. Rational parties are interdependent and bargian for comodities. Meeting high probability demads (water, food, time) increases the likelihood of low prob demands (Release hostages). Some authors argue that expressive or affective behaviour is not amendable to this stratergy, but most behaviour is a combo of emotion and rationality, so best to think of it on a continum.
Crisis negotiation exists on a spectrum of infinite variables, with scenarios and ‘key players’ shifting over time. Therefore a good working model of crisis negotiation must be flexible enough that it applies to virtually any situation (Kellin & McMurtry, 2007). For negotiations to work you must have high affiliation and interdependence, this ensures you are moving towards eachother to solve the problem - You want the HT to realised the only rational way to solve the issue is to peacefully surrender.
Behavioral Influence Stairway Model (BISM)
Vecchi (2007).
Model of behavior change grounded in the principles of active listening that was adapted from a model developed by the FBI (Vecchi, Van Hasselt, & Romano, 2005).
Highlights the importance of the relationship-building process involving the negotiator and the subject in order to achieve a peaceful resolution to the crisis situation (Noesner & Webster, 1997).
The BISM consists of four elements: 1) active listening skills, 2) empathy, 3) rapport, and 4) behavioral influence.
that must be sequentially passed through in order to resolve a crisis situation
Active listening - Mirroring, Paraphrasing, Summarising, Open questions and I statments.
The key element of active listening has been shown to facilitate behavior change and crisis resolution (Lanceley, 1999)
- Disscussion of behaviour change is not informative, “the subject is willing to accept the suggestions of the ne- gotiator as a prelude to behavior change” - While alliance is important, it is not sufficient in changing behaviour.
The Cylindrical Model of Crisis Negotiation
Taylor (2002),
three-dimensional model of communication composed of three different dimensions: levels of interaction, styles of communication, and the degree of intensity of communication.
Levels of interaction - Avoidance communication is regression from active participation in the situation, distributive communication is self-interested and aggressive tactics, and integrative communication is normative and cooperative communication.
Styles of communication reflect the motivations - Instrumental communication when they are motivated to maximize gain of desired outcomes, relational communication when they are motivated to establish and utilize relationships and identity communication when they are motivated to create a desired self-expression.
Intensity as the third dimension of the model. Taylor defines intensity as the extent to which the speaker’s verbal behavior shows a deviation from emotional neutrality - high intensity is detrimental to a peaceful negotiation outcome.
+attempts to comprehensively model the communication process of a negotiation.
+Specifies stages through which the negotiation progresses in order for the negotiation to be successful.
+Takes into account the motivations of the hostage taker and how they can dictate the negotiation outcome
-Focuses almost exclusively on the behavior of the hostage taker and very little on the negotiator - provides little guidance for a negotiator
-Not empirical validated, so there is no way to know that negotiations will progress in the way described
Structured Tactical Engagement Process (STEPS) model
Kellin and McMurtry (2007)
STEPS views the crisis situation as a behavioral problem. The barricaded subject needs to develop the motivation and commitment to peacefully surrender. The job of the crisis negotiator is to assess what stage the subject is at and then work from there.
A crisis situation has to go through four stages in order to reach successful resolution. The authors propose that a variety of skills/techniques can be utilized in order to help guide subjects through these four stages.
Precontemplation stage -
Subject is unwilling to acknowledge that the situation or their behavior needs to change. Uncooperative and unrealistic. Research has implicated the role of rapport in facilitating behavior change (Miller & Rollnick, 2002)
Contemplative stage - subject is realising that their behavior and situation need to change, but they are not sure how to do this. Negotiators job is to affirm the need for a peaceful resolution while increasing the subject’s confidence
Preparation - Beginning to consider and possibly commit to a resolution. Negotiator’s role becomes more proactive and directive to develop an appropriate exit strategy.
Action - subject should be carrying out the agreed-upon plan for peaceful resolution. It is vital that the negotiator remains supportive and directive throughout the final step,
+provides an understanding of the motivational status of the subject (i.e., how ready the subject is to change his/her behavior and resolve the situation)
+Vecchi and colleagues (2005) noted that a subject’s emotional state must be addressed first in order for problem-solving strategies to be successful. Step 0 and some of Step 1 are devoted to defusing a subject’s emotions in order to more effectively problem-solve.
- focuses a great deal on how the hostage taker progresses through these stages rather than the relationship that develops between the hostage taker and the negotiator or the role that the negotiator plays
- only briefly mentions the actions taken by the negotiator and provides more rule-based guidance
- model relies on knowing the internal psychological state of the hostage taker and provides very limited guidance on how to do this
General evaluation
It is clear from the variety of models which have been devised to account for effective negotiation strategies that there is no singular theoretical blueprint which can be adhered to in order to achieve successful resolution of crisis situations.
It seems sensible to suggest that a combination of strategies or techniques may be useful depending on the circumstances of the crisis situation.
- Important - models relate specifically to the culture/society in which they were devised and as such may not be directly applicable cross-culturally.
- The majority of the research on crisis negotiation has been conducted in the United States and has particular relevance to countries which adhere to the right to bear arms.
- literature has tended to focus on the techniques and strategies employed by the negotiators during the crisis. An aspect which has not been explored in such detail is that of the characteristics, traits and skills which may enhance a negotiators ability to perform effectively within their role.
