Police negotiators work in small units or teams. In a crisis negotiation, one of the team becomes the ‘primary’ negotiator and talks with the person in crisis. However, because the person in crisis may refuse to participate, and because several negotiators are co-present, there are multiple opportunities for negotiators to talk between themselves, ‘behind-the-scenes’. We used conversation analysis to analyse these interstitial sequences in a corpus of audio-recorded UK suicide crisis negotiations. Our analysis focused on how negotiators talk about what, when, and how to communicate to people in crisis. We found that negotiators evaluated different communication technologies and modalities (e.g., telephone versus face-to-face) and physical locations (e.g., standing on the ground versus on a roof) in terms of their affordances for future interactions and impact on previous ones. Second, negotiators (re)formulated what and how to communicate with persons in crisis and evaluated hypothetical consequences. Third, they evaluated their progress in terms of specific (in)effective words and phrases. The analysis shows how negotiators, in contrast to individual post hoc reflection, come to share live scrutiny of their negotiation practice. Overall, the paper augments what we know about the low frequency but high-stakes activity of crisis negotiation.

警察谈判人员在小单位或团队中工作。在危机谈判中，团队中的一个人成为“主要”谈判者并与处于危机中的人交谈。然而，由于处于危机中的人可能会拒绝参与，而且由于有几位谈判者同时在场，因此谈判者之间有很多机会在“幕后”进行对话。我们使用对话分析来分析录音的英国自杀危机谈判语料库中的这些间隙序列。我们的分析侧重于谈判者如何谈论与处于危机中的人沟通的内容、时间和方式。我们发现谈判者评估了不同的通信技术和方式（例如，电话与面对面）和实际位置（例如，站在地面上还是在屋顶上），就它们对未来互动的可供性和对以前互动的影响而言。其次，谈判者（重新）制定了与处于危机中的人沟通的内容和方式，并评估了假设的后果。第三，他们根据具体（无效）的单词和短语来评估他们的进步。分析表明，与个人事后反思相比，谈判者如何分享对谈判实践的实时审查。总的来说，这篇论文增加了我们对危机谈判的低频率但高风险活动的了解。分析表明，与个人事后反思相比，谈判者如何分享对谈判实践的实时审查。总的来说，这篇论文增加了我们对危机谈判的低频率但高风险活动的了解。分析表明，与个人事后反思相比，谈判者如何分享对谈判实践的实时审查。总的来说，这篇论文增加了我们对危机谈判的低频率但高风险活动的了解。