Volume 21, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1384-6647
  • E-ISSN: 1569-982X
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The attitudes of interpreters providing video remote conference interpreting during the 2014 FIFA World Cup™ was analyzed using a mixed-methods approach. Quantitative and qualitative data pertaining to six deductive categories (general and specific attitudes towards remote interpreting, attitudes towards the work environment and the workspace, psychological and physiological wellbeing) were collected. Online questionnaires were completed both before and after the event and structured interviews were conducted on site during the event. Triangulation of results corroborates the technical feasibility of video remote interpreting, whilst highlighting aspects with a high potential to shape interpreters’ attitudes towards it. The quality of the technical team on site along with the availability of visual input in the entire conference room (including all speakers taking the floor) is key to offsetting the feeling of alienation or lack of immersion experienced by interpreters working with this technical setup. Suggestions for the improvement of key parameters are provided.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Agarwal, R. & Karahanna, E.
    (2000) Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly24 (4), 665–694. 10.2307/3250951
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3250951 [Google Scholar]
  2. AIIC
    AIIC (n.d.). AIIC Workload Surveys. https://aiic.net/surveys/findings/ (accessed15 December 2016).
  3. Azarmina, P. & Wallace, P.
    (2005) Remote interpretation in medical encounters: A systematic review. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare11, 140–145. 10.1258/1357633053688679
    https://doi.org/10.1258/1357633053688679 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baigorri-Jalón, J.
    (2014) From Paris to Nuremberg: The birth of conference interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.111
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.111 [Google Scholar]
  5. Braun, S.
    (2013) Keep your distance? Remote interpreting in legal proceedings: A critical assessment of a growing practice. Interpreting15 (2), 200–228. 10.1075/intp.15.2.03bra
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.15.2.03bra [Google Scholar]
  6. (2015) Remote interpreting. InH. Mikkelson & R. Jourdenais (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of interpreting. New York: Routledge, 352–367.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Braun, S. & Taylor, J.
    (2015) Advances in videoconferencing and interpreting in legal proceedings. Antwerp: Intersentia.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, J. D.
    (2011) Likert items and scales of measurement. Shiken: JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter15 (1), 10–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Chou, T. J. & Ting, C. C.
    (2003) The role of flow experience in cyber-game addiction. Cyber Psychology and Behavior6 (6), 663–675. 10.1089/109493103322725469
    https://doi.org/10.1089/109493103322725469 [Google Scholar]
  10. Constable, A.
    (forthcoming). Distance interpreting: A Nuremberg moment for our times. InH. Salaets & G. Brône Eds. Linking up with video: Perspectives on interpreting practice and research. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Crano, W. D. & Prislin, R.
    (2006) Attitudes and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology57, 345–374. 10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190034
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190034 [Google Scholar]
  12. Creswell, J. W.
    (2003) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Ermi, L. & Mäyrä, F.
    (2005) Fundamental components of the gameplay experience: Analyzing immersion. InS. Castell & J. Jenson (Eds.), Changing views: Worlds in play. Selected Papers of the 2005 Digital Games Research Association’s Second International Conference. Tampere: Digital Games Research Association, 15–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Harris, L. R. & Brown, G. T. L.
    (2010) Mixing interview and questionnaire methods: Practical problems in aligning data. Practical assessment, research and evaluation15 (1), 1–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jamieson, S.
    (2004) Likert scales: How to (ab)use them. Medical Education38, 1212–1218. 10.1111/j.1365‑2929.2004.02012.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.02012.x [Google Scholar]
  16. Jones, D., Gill, P., Harrison, R., Meakin, R. & Wallace, P.
    (2003) An exploratory study of language interpretation services provided by videoconferencing. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare9, 51–56. 10.1258/135763303321159701
    https://doi.org/10.1258/135763303321159701 [Google Scholar]
  17. Locatis, C., Williamson, D., Gould-Kabler, C., Zone-Smith, L., Detzler, I., Roberson, Maisiak R. & Ackerman, M.
    (2010) Comparing in-person, video, and telephonic medical interpretation. Journal of General Internal Medicine25 (4), 345–350. 10.1007/s11606‑009‑1236‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1236-x [Google Scholar]
  18. Mertens-Hoffman Management Consultants
    Mertens-Hoffman Management Consultants (2005) Final report on the December 2004 remote interpreting test at the European Parliament. Unpublished report.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Moser-Mercer, B.
    (2003) Remote interpreting: assessment of human factors and performance parameters. Communicate!Summer 2003 www.aiic.net/ViewPage.cfm/article879.htm (accessed15 December 2016).
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2005) Remote interpreting: Issues of multi-sensory integration in a multilingual task. Meta50 (2), 727–738. 10.7202/011014ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/011014ar [Google Scholar]
  21. Mouzourakis, P.
    (1996) Videoconferencing: Techniques and challenges. Interpreting1 (1), 21–38. 10.1075/intp.1.1.03mou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.1.1.03mou [Google Scholar]
  22. (2003) That feeling of being there: vision and presence in remote interpreting. Communicate!Summer 2003 https://aiic.net/page/1173 (accessed15 December 2016).
    [Google Scholar]
  23. (2006) Remote interpreting: A technical perspective on recent experiments. Interpreting8 (1), 45–66. 10.1075/intp.8.1.04mou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.8.1.04mou [Google Scholar]
  24. Price, E., Pérez-Stable, E., Nickleach, D., Lopez, M. & Karliner, L.
    (2012) Interpreter perspectives of in-person, telephonic, and videoconferencing medical interpretations in clinical encounters. Patient Education and Counseling87 (2), 226–232. 10.1016/j.pec.2011.08.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2011.08.006 [Google Scholar]
  25. Roziner, I. & Shlesinger, M.
    (2010) Much ado about something remote: Stress and performance in remote interpreting. Interpreting12 (2), 214–247. 10.1075/intp.12.2.05roz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.12.2.05roz [Google Scholar]
  26. Seeber, K. G.
    (2015) Simultaneous interpreting. InH. Mikkelson & R. Jourdenais (Eds.), Routledge handbook of interpreting. Oxon/New York: Routledge, 79–95.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (2017) Multimodal processing in simultaneous interpreting. InJ. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley and Sons, 461–475. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch25
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch25 [Google Scholar]
  28. UNESCO
    UNESCO (1976) A teleconference experiment. A report on the experimental use of the Symphonie satellite to link UNESCO Headquarters in Paris with the Conference Centre in Nairobi. Paris: UNESCO.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Verplanken, B., Hofstee, G. & Janssen, H. J. W.
    (1998) Accessibility of affective versus cognitive components of attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology28, 23–35. 10.1002/(SICI)1099‑0992(199801/02)28:1<23::AID‑EJSP843>3.0.CO;2‑Z
    https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199801/02)28:1<23::AID-EJSP843>3.0.CO;2-Z [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): attitudes; immersion; remote interpreting; wellbeing; workspace
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error