Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations

ISSN: 1533-2586 (Print) 1533-2594 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wpcn20

Active Listening

Michael J. McMains PhD

To cite this article: Michael J. McMains PhD (2002) Active Listening, Journal of Police Crisis
Negotiations, 2:2, 69-74, DOI: 10.1300/J173v02n02_09

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J173v02n02_09

Published online: 12 Oct 2008.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1025

View related articles

Citing articles: 4 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wpcn20

Download by: [University of Sussex Library] Date: 09 June 2016, At: 14:06
 TRAINING
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 14:06 09 June 2016

Active Listening:
The Aspirin of Negotiations
Michael J. McMains, PhD

Aspirin in many ways is a wonder drug. It relieves pain, reduces

swelling and inflammation, thins the blood for people with heart condi-
tions, etc. It has multiple uses. Similarly, active listening techniques are
multipurpose skills that accomplish a myriad of things for the negotia-
tor, all at the same time. This column will look at the basic active-listen-
ing skills that every negotiator need to master and the ways each is
helpful to the negotiator.
Active listening skills are fundamental to negotiations. They open
the door for developing a relationship with the subject; they give the ne-
gotiator a nonthreatening way of responding to the subject that is dis-
arming and invites cooperation. They include:
1. Minimal Encouragers–are brief, well-timed responses that let the
subject know the negotiator is paying attention (Noesner and Webster,
1998; Bolton, 1984; McMains and Lanceley, 1995). Most people want
an audience. Showing them that you are paying attention is a powerful
response that generally keeps the subject talking and begins to build a
relationship.
Use: Minimal encouragers can be used any time during the incident
to show the subject that the negotiator is listening, interested, and wants

Michael J. McMains is affiliated with the San Antonio Police Department.

Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations, Vol. 2(2) 2002
http://www.haworthpressinc.com/store/product.asp?sku=J173
 2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 69
 70 JOURNAL OF POLICE CRISIS NEGOTIATIONS

to hear more. It is a neutral, non-threatening response that can be used

with any subject. If it is effective, it keeps the subject talking and leads
to more information.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 14:06 09 June 2016

Example: If a prisoner says, “Get back. I want you guys out of the
pod. I want to talk to the governor and I want to transfer to the
Dominquez unit.”A good minimal response would be, “and” because, it
opens the door for more explanation without challenging the subject. A
poor one would be, “All the units are alike. Why don’t you stay here?”
because, it is challenging; forcing the subject to defend his position and
is likely to lead to an increase in tension.
2. Paraphrasing–is the negotiator’s repeating the subject’s meaning
in the negotiator’s words (Bolton, 1984; Noesner and Webster, 1998). It
shows that the negotiator is listening and understands the content of the
subject’s message. It allows the subject the opportunity to clarify the
message, if it was not completely understood.
Uses: Paraphrasing can be used any time the negotiator wants to be
sure he has understood the subjects message, any time he wants the sub-
ject to know he has understood the message, or any time he needs to
stall for time. It is a particularly effective way of responding to the sub-
ject’s demands, since it makes it clear that the negotiator has heard the
demands without agreeing to anything. It can be used with any subject,
regardless of personality, because it is essentially a straightforward in-
formation exchange. It can be used in management or crisis interven-
tion.
Examples: A subject who was barricaded in his apartment with his
common law wife after the neighbors called in a disturbance said, dur-
ing the initial contact, “Get out of here or I am going to kill this bitch. I
never did like her know-it-all smile and it is really beginning to bug me.”
A good paraphrase would be, “You would like us to leave or you may
hurt somebody. You are bothered by her attitude,” because it shows that
the negotiator has heard the message. It softens the person’s statement
and it invites the subject to say more. It shows interest.
A poor paraphrase would be, “I can’t do anything for you when you
talk like that,” because it begins to set limits too early. It negates the per-
sons message about his irritation with his wife’s attitude and it commu-
nicates a lack of understanding on the part of the negotiator that will
make it hard for the man to talk because he has to work too hard to be
understood.
3. Emotional Labeling–is the use of emotionally descriptive words to
show that the negotiator understands the feelings the subject is experi-
encing (Bolton, 1984; Noesner and Webster, 1998; McMains and
 Training 71

Lanceley, 1995). It is used without comment about the validity of the

feelings. It helps deepen the relationship between the negotiator and the
subject since feelings are more personal than content, and reflecting
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 14:06 09 June 2016

them accurately shows a deeper understanding of the subject.

Uses: Emotional labeling can be used any time the subject is ex-
pressing strong feelings and they need to be defused. It can be used to
communicate a deep understanding or to check on the negotiator’s un-
derstanding of the problem. It is particularly effective with normal peo-
ple who are in crisis, inadequate, borderline, dependent, suicidal, or
angry people who need to be defused. It is the keystone to crisis inter-
vention.
Example: A subject who was angry about her husband’s wanting to
leave her for another woman said, “I have the two adulterous SOBs in
here and I am going to make them pay. Nobody should get away with
hurting other people this way. They are going to know what it is like.”
A good use of emotional labeling would be, “You sound pretty upset
and hurt about being left. It doesn’t seem fair,” because it recognizes the
feelings without judging them. It helps identify the hurt that underlies
the anger.
A poor response would be, “You don’t need to feel that way. If he
was messing around on you, he was not worth the energy,” it is judg-
mental. It tells the subject how not to feel. It minimizes the subject’s
feelings, which are a major part of who she is.
4. Mirroring–is the negotiator’s repeating the last word or phrase. It
communicates to the subject both that the negotiator is attending to
what is being said and that the negotiator understands what is being
said.
Uses: This technique can be used early in the negotiation to gather
more information about the actor and the incident without being confrontive.
It helps build rapport. It allows the subject to lead the conversation, so
the issue of who is in charge is avoided. It can be used with most sub-
jects and in either management or crisis intervention. It is particularly
effective in the crisis stage when the negotiator is still trying to get
enough information to understand what the subject’s issues are.
Example: A trapped, armed robber in a bank might say, “I have to get
out of here with the money. It is for my kid. It’s not for me.”
A good mirroring response would be, “For your kid.” To which he
might say, “Yeah. He’s got a fever and an infection and we don’t have
money for the pills he supposed to take. He needs the money for the pills.”
 72 JOURNAL OF POLICE CRISIS NEGOTIATIONS

A poor mirroring response would be, “You expect me to believe, ‘it’s

not for you,’” because it is too judgmental and misses the primary point
of the subject’s message.
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 14:06 09 June 2016

5. Open-ended questions–are questions that encourage the subject to

talk by asking things that cannot be answered with one word answers
(Noesner and Webster, 1998; McMains and Lanceley, 1995).
Uses: Open-ended questions are used at any time during management
or crisis intervention when more information is needed to understand
what is going on, or when the negotiator needs to stall and cannot think of
anything else to say, or wants to keep the attention on the subject. It is im-
portant to ask open-ended questions in the crisis stage to help clarify what
is going on and to give the subject the impression of the negotiator paying
him or her close attention. They can be used with any type of person.
Examples: A local businessman barricaded himself in his apartment,
threatening to kill himself when his wife showed him the credit card re-
ceipts from his affair. He said, “I just can’t have it known that I had an
affair. It would be too much, if people knew that my wife and I are hav-
ing trouble. People have always thought we were the perfect couple.” A
good open-ended question would be, “Sounds like a tough deal. Tell me
how it all happened,” because it is non-judgmental, shows interest and
is likely to lead to more information about the man’s situation.
A poor response would be, “Do you have a gun? What kind? How
many bullets do you have?,” because, it forces the man into one word
answers, gives the impression that the negotiator is more interested in
the gun than the man, and communicates a sense of urgency that will
build rather than defuse tension.
6. “I-messages”–are messages that personalize the negotiator
without it becoming a personal attack (Noesner and Webster, 1998).
They let the negotiator send a message about how things effect him or
her without blaming the subject. It takes the form of, “When ___
__________ happens, I feel________________, because__________
________.” (Bolton, 1983; McMains and Lanceley, 1995). They can be
used to show the subject different ideas about the situation in an indirect
way that does not threaten the subject or arouse his or her tendency to
resist being told what to do.
Uses: “I-messages” can be used toward the end of the crisis stage or
during the management stage or resolution stage, when the negotiator
judges that the subject is calm enough to hear alternatives that are pre-
sented in a nonthreatening way.
Examples: A man broke into his own house after having agreed to stay
at his mother’s house because of the strained relationship between him
 Training 73

and his wife. He had been drinking and he had a rifle. He fired two rounds
into the ceiling of the doublewide. After negotiators made contact and he
began to settle down, he said, “If you will just bring my wife over, I know
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 14:06 09 June 2016

we can work this out. We have done it before when things got rough.” A
good “I-message” would be, “When there is alcohol involved, I get wor-
ried, because it makes people do funny things,” because it suggests that as
long as the man is drinking, he will not be able to see his wife because the
negotiator is uncomfortable, not because of something he has done. It is
nonthreatening and the man does not have to defend himself.
A poor response would be “As long as you are drinking, I am not go-
ing to let you see your wife because you are more likely to hurt her.” It is
poor because it puts the responsibility on the man and makes it more
likely that he will feel like he has to defend his position.
7. Effective pauses–are periods of silence that are used to emphasize
a point (Noesner and Webster, 1998) or to encourage the subject to say
more (McMains and Lanceley, 1995). They can also be used to help de-
fuse an intense emotional harangue. By being quiet and not responding
to an attack, negotiators can side step a confrontation and allow the sub-
ject the time to vent his frustration, anger, and/or hurt.
Uses: Effective pauses are used after the subject seems to have fin-
ished saying all he has to say about a topic or when the negotiator has
made an important point. It is simply waiting 10-15 seconds before say-
ing anything more or simply not responding after a temper tantrum. It can
be used at any time in a negotiation or crisis intervention. It is particularly
important to wait after a person who is depressed seems to have finished,
because they sometimes have more to say, but are slow thinking about it.
Examples: In trying to assess the resources a depressed person has
available, the negotiator may ask, “What did you do to feel better when
you were depressed before?” and does not get an immediate response.
Good response: Simply waiting 10 seconds more, because it allows
the depressed person time to respond and it uses people’s discomfort
with silences to put subtle pressure on them to talk.
Poor response: Asking two more questions in that 10 seconds, be-
cause, it does not give the person the time to work at their pace and it ex-
poses the negotiator’s discomfort with silences and with the lack of
action. It increases the stress on the person.
8. Reflecting meaning–is the ability to show the subject that the
negotiator understands the content, the emotion and the implications
of his situation. It is used to summarize understanding, to give the sub-
ject a chance to clarify any issue the negotiator does not have clear, and
to build rapport (McMains and Lanceley, 1994). It takes the form of
“When __________________ happens, you feel ___________________,
 74 JOURNAL OF POLICE CRISIS NEGOTIATIONS

because ________________,” and “because” looks to what the subject ex-

pects to happen as a result of whatever followed “When.”
Uses: Reflecting meaning can be used whenever the negotiator
thinks that he or she understands the subject’s problems well enough
Downloaded by [University of Sussex Library] at 14:06 09 June 2016

to help solve them and to check on the accuracy of his or her under-
standing. It is generally used during the adaptation stage to help define
the problem. It is effective after the subject has calmed down and is
ready to focus on the issues. It can be used with any personality type.
Example: The 28-year-old subject who is angry and suicidal because
his mother threw him out of the house says, “I’ve had it with the whole
deal. I lose my job and my truck because I can’t make the payments.
Now, she’s evicting me. I’ve got nowhere to go. I’ll show her, she’ll be
sorry when I’m gone.”
A good reflection of meaning would be, “When you think about be-
ing out there by yourself, it’s pretty scary, because you are afraid you
can’t make it by yourself, especially with no job and no way to get
around. And, when you think about your mother wanting you to leave,
you get angry and want to get back at her, because you don’t think she
has a right to do that and you want to.” It shows attention, and a depth of
understanding. It clearly defines the problem for both the subject and
the negotiator.
A poor response would be, “Why would you want to do that? You
can handle it like a man. It’s time you were on your own, anyway.” This
response challenges the subject and is judgemental. It seems to ally the
negotiator with the mother about whom the subject is angry. It is not
likely to build rapport.
Like aspirin, active listening skills need to be used to be effective. If
you have a headache, taking the aspirin bottle out of the medicine cabi-
net, reading the label, and placing it carefully on the mantel only teaches
you how aspirin is supposed to be taken. It does not do you any good,
until you actually use it. Likewise, reading about active-listening skills
only teaches you what they are and when to use them. You still must use
them. Practicing on your friends, family and people with whom you
deal with every day will help you use, develop, and get the most out of
the wonder of listening.

REFERENCES
Bolton, R. (1984). People Skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McMains, M. J. and F. J. Lanceley. (1995). “The Use of Crisis Intervention Principles
in Hostage Negotiations.” Journal of Hostage Negotiations 1(2):12-23.
Noesner, G. and M. Webster. (1998). “Crisis Negotiations as Crisis Intervention.” In:
Crisis Negotiations: A Compendium. Quantico, VA: Crisis Negotiations Unit,
CIRG, FBI Academy.