# Considerations for Developing Robot-Assisted Crisis De-Escalation Practices
## 2 Crisis De-Escalation  
For the purposes of this paper, a crisis is defined as a short-term and overwhelming event involving a disruption of an individual's normal and stable state, in which the usual coping and problem-solving mechanisms do not work [7]. In this paper, we further narrow our lens by focusing specifically on crises in which there is an element of agitation and the potential for aggression. For a safe resolution of the crisis, it is critical for responders to effectively interrupt the progression of agitation to violence [8]. One way of interrupting this progression is through the implementation of de-escalation strategies. De-escalation strategies refer to a complex range of verbal and non-verbal skills designed to enable agitated individuals to rapidly develop their own internal locus of control [9; 10] and to shift away from a trajectory that may lead to aggression. De-escalation is commonly practiced by health care workers and mental health nurses, with an increasing uptake in police and security services [11]. Notably, there is no consensus regarding a clear definition of optimal de-escalation techniques or guidelines [12]. Furthermore, most research on de-escalation focuses on the impact of de-escalation training programs (e.g., Crisis Intervention Training, Six Core Strategies) on reducing physical restraint, injury, or violence towards service providers. Although research on the effectiveness of training is relevant for advancing the field of human-led de-escalation, it does not elucidate which intervention strategies promote effective de-escalation. For example, most de-escalation training programs contain a significant psychoeducational component designed to debunk myths about violent behaviour and equip staff with a better understanding of the underlying psychology of agitated individuals in crisis. The rationale for such training is that, with such information, staff will perceive and approach agitated individuals in a more appropriate manner, perhaps with greater empathy and respect, setting the stage for a better de-escalation interaction and outcome. Although this training may be helpful from a human perspective, this research offers little in the way of understanding the specific, moment-to-moment manifestations of effective de-escalation needed to translate such practices into human-robot interactions. The evidence base of effective de-escalation techniques for human-human interactions is limited; however, researchers have conducted qualitative studies, literature reviews, and convened expert working groups in an attempt to elucidate the concepts related to human de-escalation interactions and to identify common strategies and best practices across professional disciplines. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [12] conducted a concept analysis, reviewing 79 papers investigating human-to-human de-escalation over the past three decades. They identified five domains of de-escalation skills: communication, assessment, self-regulation, actions, and maintaining safety. [PERSON] and colleagues [13] created and validated a modified English language version of a pre-existing structured measure of de-escalation practices [14] containing seven domains of skills: valuing the client, reducing fear, inquiring about client's queries and anxieties, providing guidance to the client, working out possible agreements, remaining calm, and risk management. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [11] conducted a systematic observational study of police de-escalation tactics in Spokane, Washington, identifying eight categories of de-escalation tactics: respect, honesty, calmness, perspective-taking, compromise, listening, getting to the client's level and reducing power imbalances, and client empowerment. They observed that the use of several of these tactics was associated with a calmer citizen demeanor. Finally, [PERSON] et al.