Navigating the Paradox: An Examination of Compliance-Gaining and Relational Development in Hostage Incidents

This study sought to examine potential relationships between compliance-gaining strategy use and the outcome of hostage negotiation events. Persuasion has been identified as being a critical yet understudied part of the negotiation process. Utilizing the theory of Speech Acts, this study argued that compliance-gaining strategies play an essential role in the hostage recovery process. Specifically, compliance-gaining strategies allow the negotiator to exercise persuasion during the negotiation process while also building an interaction context that allows the hostage taker to feel as if the negotiator is working with, rather than against, the perpetrator. This type of relationship allows the negotiator to exert a greater degree of influence in the incident. Through analyzing nine hostage incidents, this study was able to identify compliance-gaining tactics that related to the outcome of hostage events. Compliance-gaining tactics that reduce relational distance were related to peaceful outcomes and compliance-gaining tactics that increased relational distance were related to unsuccessful outcomes. This study also found that the use of compliance-gaining tactics was particularly important in the final Resolution stage of hostage incidents. In examining the ways that the parties respond to the use of compliance-gaining techniques, the hostage takers\u27 use of Agreement or Disagreement were discovered to be related to incident outcome. Practical applications for negotiation professionals, disciplinary contributions, and study limitations were also discussed