De-escalation
De-escalation refers to the methods and actions taken in order to decrease the severity of a conflict, whether it may be of a physical, verbal, or other nature. It is directly antithetical to the concept of escalation. It may also refer to approaches in conflict resolution, by which specific measures are taken to avoid behaviors that tend to escalate conflict. De-escalation can be modeled with game theory.[1]
Psychology[edit]
Verbal de-escalation in psychiatric settings[edit]
In psychiatric settings, de-escalation is aimed at calmly communicating with an agitated client in order to understand, manage and resolve their concerns. Ultimately, these actions are intended to reduce the client's agitation and potential for future aggression or violence. An insufficient or overdue intervention may leave staff needing to use coercive measures to manage an aggressive or violent client. Coercive measures, such as chemical or mechanical restraints, or seclusion, are damaging to the therapeutic relationship and harmful to clients and staff.[2][3]
A review of the literature conducted by Mavandadi, Bieling and Madsen (2016)[4] identifies 19 articles that defined or provided a model of de-escalation.
Articles converge on a number of themes (i.e. de-escalation should involve safely, calmly and empathetically supporting the client with their concerns). Hankin et al.’s (2011)[5] review of four de-escalation studies reflected the somewhat unclear state of de-escalation research. Their review settled on eight goals, seven elements, 15 general techniques and 15 other techniques divided into three subheadings. In addition, an attempt to synthesize the various models and definitions was conducted by Price & Baker (2012).[6] Thematic analysis of 11 eligible studies converged on seven themes: three related to staff skills (e.g. empathetic concern, calm appearance and gentle tone of voice) and four related to the process of intervening (e.g. establish rapport, maintain safety, problem solve and set limits). The available literature provides clinical descriptions of effective de-escalation based on qualitative data and professional observations. However, these thematic analyses need to be supported by more objective data; one hallmark of such objectivity would be an empirical scale or quantitative measure of de-escalation.
De-Escalating Aggressive Behaviour Scale (DABS)[edit]
An English modified version of the De-Escalating Aggressive Behaviour Scale (DABS) states:
International relations[edit]
In the military, de-escalation is a way to prevent military conflict escalation. A historic example is the teaching harvested from the Proud Prophet war simulation of a conflict between the USA and the USSR, which took place in 1983. In war-time diplomacy, de-escalation is used as an exit strategy, sometimes called an "off-ramp" or "slip road". In such cases, an alternative peaceful resolution is offered to a belligerent (i.e. nation or person engaged in war or conflict) in order to avoid further bloodshed.[24][25][26] Restraint or appeasement against interventionism can in some cases lead to escalation instead of de-escalation.[27] Deterrence is one strategy to decrease conflict severity.[28] In asymmetric conflicts a probabilistic escalation might be rational for one side in some situations, resulting in challenges for de-escalation.[29]