Interpreter performance in police interviews. Differences between trained interpreters and untrained bilinguals

ABSTRACT

In most countries, it is not compulsory to be trained to work as an interpreter in community settings. A comparison across jurisdictions reveals that different requirements exist, from a simple self-evaluation of language competence, to passing a certification or accreditation test. Even in countries where certification or accreditation systems exist, such as the USA and Australia, there is no legislation to prevent any bilingual from working as interpreter. In legal settings, this situation has led to a lack of clear guidelines regarding interpreter recruitment, and to many examples of incompetent interpreting that have impacted legal outcomes. Little research has been conducted to systematically assess the value of training on interpreter performance. This paper presents results of a live experimental study conducted in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, showing significant differences between the performance of trained interpreters and untrained bilinguals in simulated police interviews. The study is one of a few to compare performance based on interpreter background, using a large sample and a sophisticated method to assess performance.

KEYWORDS:

• Interpreter competence
• interpreter performance
• accuracy of interpreting
• police interpreting
• specialist legal interpreter training

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to our many research assistants, especially to Dr Julie Lim and Adela Ezcurra. We also thank all the participants who made this study possible.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, [SH]. The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. AUSIT is the Australian Institute for Interpreters and Translators.

2. TAFE stands for Technical and Further Education.

3. NAATI is the National Accreditation Authority for Translators and Interpreters.

4. As of January 2018, NAATI commenced a new certification system. See www.naati.com.au for all details.

5. According to Cohen (1988) d = .22 is interpreted as a ‘small’, d = .51 as a ‘medium’, and d = .83 as a ‘large’ effect size. The effect size d is indicated by how many standard deviations two groups differ from each other.

6. According to Cohen (1988) r = .11 is interpreted as a ‘small’, r = .24 as a ‘medium’, and r = .44 as a ‘large’ effect size.

7. In 2018, NAATI changed their system from accreditation to certification. Accredited interpreters were invited to transition to the new system by proving at least a certain number of hours of active professional practice during the previous three years. Consequently, many of the previously accredited interpreters who no longer practice, did not transition. See naati.org.au for further details.

Additional information

Funding

The research was funded by the Federal Bureau of Investigations Grant J-FBI-10-009 “High Value Detainee Interrogation Group Intelligence Interviewing and Investigation” through the Center for Law and Human Behaviour at the University of Texas at El Paso.