Video-mediated interpreting in legal settings in England

References

1. Balogh, Katalin, and Erik Hertog
   2012 “AVIDICUS comparative studies – Part II: Traditional, videoconference and remote interpreting in police interviews.” InVideoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. bySabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 119–136. Cambridge: Intersentia.
   [Google Scholar]
2. BID Bail for Immigration Detainees
   BID Bail for Immigration Detainees 2008 Immigration Bail Hearings by Video Link: A Monitoring Exercise by Bail for Immigration Detainees and the Refugee Council. refugeecouncil.org.uk/policy/position/2008/bail_hearings. Last accessed21 May 2018.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Braun, Sabine
   2007 “Interpreting in small-group bilingual videoconferences: challenges and adaptation processes.” Interpreting9(1): 21–46. 10.1075/intp.9.1.03bra
   https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.9.1.03bra [Google Scholar]
4. Braun, Sabine
   2012 “Recommendations for the use of video-mediated interpreting in criminal proceedings.” InVideoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. bySabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 301–328. Cambridge: Intersentia.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Braun, Sabine
   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. Braun, Sabine
   2014 “Comparing traditional and remote interpreting in police settings: quality and impact factors.” InTraduzione e interpretazione per la società e le istituzioni, ed. ByMaurizio Viezzi and Caterina Falbo, 161–176. Trieste: Edizioni Università di Trieste.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Braun, Sabine
   2015 “Remote Interpreting.” InRoutledge Handbook of Interpreting, ed. byHolly Mikkelson and Renée Jourdenais, 352–367. New York: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Braun, Sabine
   2017 “What a micro-analytical investigation of additions and expansions in remote interpreting can tell us about interpreter’s participation in a shared virtual space.” Journal of Pragmatics107: 165–177. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.011
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.09.011 [Google Scholar]
9. Braun, Sabine, Elena Davitti, and Sara Dicerto
   2018 “Assessing the implementation of facilities for bilingual videoconferencing in the European justice sector.” InHere or There: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, ed. byJemina Napier, Robert Skinner, and Sabine Braun, 144–179. Washington, DC: Gallaudet.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Braun, Sabine, and Judith Taylor
    (eds) 2012a Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Cambridge: Intersentia.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Braun, Sabine, and Judith Taylor
    2012b “Video-mediated interpreting in criminal proceedings: Two European surveys.” InVideoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. bySabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 69–98. Cambridge: Intersentia.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Braun, Sabine, and Judith Taylor
    2012c “AVIDICUS comparative studies – part I: Traditional interpreting and remote interpreting in police interviews.” InVideoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. bySabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 99–118. Cambridge: Intersentia.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Braun, Sabine, Judith Taylor, Joanna Miler-Cassino, Zofia Rybinska, Katalin Balogh, Erik Hertog, and Dirk Rombouts
    2012 “Training in video-mediated interpreting in criminal proceedings: modules for interpreting students, legal interpreters and legal practitioners.” InVideoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. bySabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 233–288. Cambridge: Intersentia.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Devaux, Jerome
    2017 Technologies in Interpreter-mediated Criminal Court Hearings: An Actor-Network Theory Account of the Interpreter’s Perception of her Role-space. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Salford, Salford.
15. Ellis, Ronald
    2004 Videoconferencing in Refugee Hearings. Ellis Report to the Immigration and Refugee Board Audit and Evaluation Committee. irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/transp/ReviewEval/Pages/Video.aspx. Last accessed21 May 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Fowler, Yvonne
    2013 Non-English-speaking Defendants in the Magistrates’ Court: A Comparative Study of Face-to-Face and Prison Video Link Interpreter-mediated Hearings in England. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Aston University, Birmingham.
17. Hedges, Larry
    1981 “Distribution theory for Glass’ estimator of effect size and related estimators.” Journal of Educational Statistics6(2): 107–128. 10.3102/10769986006002107
    https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986006002107 [Google Scholar]
18. Justice Committee
    Justice Committee 2013 Interpreting and Translation Services and the Applied Language Solutions Contract. publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmjust/645/64502.htm. Last accessed21 May 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Koller, Myriam, and Franz Pöchhacker
    2018 “The work and skills…: A profile of first-generation video remote interpreters.” InHere or there: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, ed. byJemina Napier, Robert Skinner, and Sabine Braun, 89–110. Washington, DC: Gallaudet.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Licoppe, Cristian, and Maud Verdier
    2014 “Interpreting, video communication and the sequential reshaping of institutional talk in the bilingual and distributed courtroom.” International Journal of Speech, Language and the Law20: 247–276.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Licoppe, Cristian, Maud Verdier, and Clair-Antoine Veyrier
    2018 “Voice, power and turn-taking in multilingual, consecutively interpreted courtroom proceedings with video links.” InHere or there: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, ed. byJemina Napier, Robert Skinner, and Sabine Braun, 299–322. Washington, DC: Gallaudet.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Locatis, Craig, Deborah Williamson, Carrie Gould-Kabler, Laurie Zone-Smith, Isabel Detzler, Jason Roberson, Richard Maisiak, and Michael Ackerman
    2010 “Comparing in-person, video, and telephonic medical interpretation.” Journal of General Internal Medicine25(4): 345–50. 10.1007/s11606‑009‑1236‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-009-1236-x [Google Scholar]
23. Moser-Mercer, Barbara
    2003 “Remote interpreting: assessment of human factors and performance parameters.” Communicate!Summer 2003 aiic.net/page/1125/remote-interpreting-assessment-of-human-factors-and-pe/lang/1. Last accessed21 May 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Mouzourakis, Panagiotis
    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]
25. Napier, Jemina
    2012 “Here or there? An assessment of video remote signed language interpreter-mediated interaction in court.” InVideoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. bySabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 167–214. Cambridge: Intersentia.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Miler-Cassino, Joanna, and Zofia Rybinska
    2012 “AVIDICUS comparative studies – part III: Traditional interpreting and videoconference interpreting in prosecution interviews.” InVideoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings, ed. bySabine Braun and Judith Taylor, 117–136. Cambridge: Intersentia.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Plotnikoff, Joyce, and Richard Woolfson
    1999 Preliminary Hearings: Video Links Evaluation of Pilot Projects. Final Report. lexiconlimited.co.uk/servicespublications/evaluating-legislation/. Last accessed21 May 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Plotnikoff, Joyce, and Richard Woolfson
    2000 Evaluation of Video Link Pilot. Project at Manchester Crown Court. Final Report. lexiconlimited.co.uk/servicespublications/​evaluating-legislation/. Last accessed21 May 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Price, Erika, Eliseo Pérez-Stable, Dana Nickleach, Monica López, and Leah Karliner
    2012 “Interpreter perspectives of in-person, telephonic, and videoconferencing medical interpretation 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]
30. Public Accounts Committee
    Public Accounts Committee 2012 “The Ministry of Justice’s language service contract.” publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/​cmpubacc/620/62002.htm. Last accessed21 May 2018.
31. Roziner, Ilan, and Miriam Shlesinger
    2010 “Much ado about something remote: Stress and performance in remote interpreting.” Interpreting12(2): 214–47. 10.1075/intp.12.2.05roz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.12.2.05roz [Google Scholar]
32. Ruxton, Graeme
    2006 “The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to Student’s t-test and the Mann – Whitney U test.” Behavioral Ecology17(4): 688–690. 10.1093/beheco/ark016
    https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/ark016 [Google Scholar]
33. Skinner, Robert, Jemina Napier, and Sabine Braun
    2018 “Interpreting via video link: Mapping of the field.” InHere or there: Research on Interpreting via Video Link, ed. byJemina Napier, Robert Skinner, and Sabine Braun, 11–35. Washington, DC: Gallaudet.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Terry, Matthew, Steve Johnson, and Peter Thompson
    2010 Virtual Court Pilot Outcome Evaluation. justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/virtual-courts.pdf. Last accessed21 May 2018.
    [Google Scholar]