Summary One of several papers showing how the tactics we have developed for use within low-context (individualistic) cultures can be less effective when used in interactions with those with other cultural backgrounds. With the growing cultural diversity of the suspects officers encounter, knowledge of such differences is becoming increasingly important.
| Link to article in Journal of Applied Psychology |
Abstract This research examines cultural differences in negotiators’ responses to rational persuasion in crisis negotiations over time. Using a new method of examining cue-response patterns, we examined 25 crisis negotiations in which police negotiators interacted with perpetrators from low- or high-context cultures. As predicted, low-context more than high-context perpetrators were found to use persuasive arguments, to reciprocate persuasive arguments, and to respond to persuasive arguments in a compromising way. These effects were partly mediated by time period, with the more normative, later period of interaction associated with larger cultural effects than the early crisis-dominated period of interaction. Further analyses found that low-context perpetrators were more likely to communicate threats, but that high-context negotiators were more likely to reciprocate them. The implications of these findings for our understanding of inter-cultural interaction are discussed.