Cover not available

Article published In: Translation and Interpreting Studies
Vol. 20:2 (2025) ► pp.212–243

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

The impact of remote interpreting settings on interpreter experience and performance

ORCiD logo with link | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ORCiD logo with link | Università di Bologna
ORCiD logo with link | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ORCiD logo with link | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
ORCiD logo with link | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ORCiD logo with link | Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań
ORCiD logo with link | Università di Bologna
Published online: 13 October 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.24125.chm
Abstract
This study investigates the effect of different remote simultaneous interpreting (RSI) settings on interpreter performance, experience, anxiety, and cognitive load. Thirty-six professional English-Polish and Spanish-Italian interpreters performed RSI in three conditions: with a co-located boothmate, a not co-located boothmate communicating via chat, and a boothmate in a virtual booth. Interpreter renditions, questionnaire responses, and eye-tracking data were analyzed. Objective accuracy and self-assessed performance were scored lowest in the not co-located setting, with little difference between the co-located and virtual conditions, suggesting that virtual booths may effectively replicate traditional booths. Unexpectedly, boothmate presence did not affect cognitive load, anxiety or user experience, demonstrating interpreters’ adaptability to diverse RSI setups. Findings also suggest positive attitudes toward technology and high technological competence improve user experience and facilitate more structured visual attention. The study enhances our understanding of RSI and underscores interpreters’ ability to navigate visually complex environments.
Article outline
  • Introduction
    • Interpreters’ performance in RSI
    • Interpreters’ attitudes toward RSI
    • Interaction with boothmates in RSI
    • Visual needs and attention
  • The present study
    • Participants
    • Materials and measures
    • Equipment
    • Procedure
    • Accuracy analysis
  • Results
    • Accuracy
    • Self-reported cognitive load and performance (NASA-TLX)
    • Self-reported anxiety (STAI)
    • User experience and attitude to technology
    • Eye-tracking measures
  • Discussion
    • Accuracy
    • Self-reported cognitive load and performance (NASA-TLX)
    • Self-reported anxiety (STAI)
    • User experience and attitude to technology
    • Eye-tracking measures
    • Limitations
  • Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (57)
References
AIIC. 2020. “2020 AIIC Research Grant, Call for Applications.” Accessed December 4, 2024. [URL]
Baumann, Antonia. 2023. “The pandemic booth: How spatial reconfigurations during the pandemic influence cooperation and communication among conference interpreters.” Interpreting and Society 3(2): 150–168. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Braun, Sabine. 2019. “Technology and interpreting.” In Routledge Handbook of Translation and Technology, ed. by Minako O’Hagan, 271–288. London: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buján, Marta, and Camille Collard. 2022. “Remote simultaneous interpreting and COVID-19: Conference interpreters’ perspective.” In Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19, ed. by Kanglong Liu and Andrew K. F. Cheung, 133–150. Singapore: Springer Nature. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, Sijia. 2017. “The construct of cognitive load in interpreting and its measurement.” Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice 25(4): 640–657. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheung, Andrew K. F. 2023. “Remote simultaneous interpreting from home or hub: Accuracy of numbers from English into Mandarin Chinese.” In Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19, ed. by Kanglong Liu and Andrew K. F. Cheung, 113–132. Singapore: Springer Nature. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cifuentes-Férez, Paula, Ana Rojo López, and Laura Espín López. 2024. “Self-efficacy as a protective factor when translating under time pressure.” Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 211: 35–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuetos, Fernando, María González-Nosti, Analía Barbón, and Marc Brysbaert. 2011. “SUBTLEX-ESP: Spanish word frequencies based on film subtitles.” Psicológica 321: 133–143.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DG SCIC. 2019. “Interpreting platforms: Consolidated test results and analysis.” DG SCIC. Accessed December 5, 2024. [URL]
Doherty, Stephen, Natalie Martschuk, Jane Goodman-Delahunty, and Sandra Hale. 2022. “An eye-movement analysis of overt visual attention during consecutive and simultaneous interpreting modes in a remotely interpreted investigative interview.” Frontiers in Psychology 131: 764460. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Donovan, Clare. 2023. “The consequences of fully remote interpretation on interpreter interaction and cooperation: A threat to professional cohesion?” INContext: Studies in Translation and Interculturalism 3(1): 24–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Environmental Implementation Review. 2022. “Environmental Implementation Review.” Accessed November 4, 2024. [URL]
Fan, Damien Chia-Ming. 2022. “Remote simultaneous interpreting: Exploring experiences and opinions of conference interpreters in Taiwan.” Compilation and Translation Review 15(2): 159–198.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández Huerta, José. 1959. “Medidas sencillas de lecturabilidad.” Consigna 2141: 29–32.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gunning, Robert. 1969. “The Fog Index after twenty years.” International Journal of Business Communication 6(2): 3–13. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hart, Sandra G., and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. “Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research.” In Human Mental Workload, ed. by Peter A. Hancock and Najmedin Meshkati, 139–183. North-Holland: Elsevier Science. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmqvist, Kenneth, et al. 2015. Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hvelplund, Kristian Tangsgaard. 2014. “Eye tracking and the translation process: Reflections on the analysis and interpretation of eye-tracking data.” MonTI: Monografías de Traducción e Interpretación. Special issue 11: 201–223. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ISO 20539:2023. Translation, interpreting and related technology. Vocabulary. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Izura, Cristina, Fernando Cuetos, and Marc Brysbaert. 2014. “Lextale-Esp: A test to rapidly and efficiently assess the Spanish vocabulary size.” Psicológica 35(1): 49–66.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke, and Kristian Tangsgaard Hvelplund Jensen. 2008. “Eye movement behaviour across four different types of reading tasks.” In Looking at Eyes: Eye-tracking studies of Reading and Translation Processing, ed. by Susanne Göpferich, Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, and Inger M. Mees, 103–124. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jiménez Ivars, Amparo, and Daniel Pinazo Calatayud. 2001. “‘I failed because i got very nervous’: Anxiety and performance in interpreting trainees: An empirical study.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 111: 105–119.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Julian, Laura J. 2011. “Measures of anxiety: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety (HADS-A).” Arthritis Care & Research 631: S467–S472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kajzer-Wietrzny, Marta, Ilmari Ivaska, and Adriano Ferraresi. 2021. “‘Lost’ in interpreting and ‘found’ in translation: Using an intermodal, multidirectional parallel corpus to investigate the rendition of numbers.” Perspectives 29(4): 469–488. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Korpal, Paweł. 2017. Linguistic and Psychological Indicators of Stress in Simultaneous Interpreting. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laugwitz, Bettina, Theo Held, and Martin Schrepp. 2008. “Construction and evaluation of a user experience questionnaire.” In HCI and Usability for Education and Work, ed. by Andreas Holzinger, 63–76. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, Kristin, and Mirjam Broersma. 2012. “Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English.” Behavior Research Methods 44(2): 325–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahyub Rayaa, Bachir, and Anne Martin. 2022. “Remote simultaneous interpreting: Perceptions, practices and developments.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 271: 21–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson. 2018. “Interpreter traits and the relationship with technology and visibility.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 13(3): 366–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Monti, Cristina, Claudio Bendazzoli, Annalisa Sandrelli, and Mariachiara Russo. 2005. “Studying directionality in simultaneous interpreting through an electronic corpus: EPIC (European Parliament Interpreting Corpus).” Meta: Translators’ Journal 50(4). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moser-Mercer, Barbara. 2005. “Remote interpreting: The crucial role of presence.” Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée 811: 73–97.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. “Skill acquisition in interpreting.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2(1): 1–28. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ratchford, Mark, and Michelle Barnhart. 2012. “Development and validation of the Technology Adoption Propensity (TAP) Index.” Journal of Business Research 65(8): 1209–1215. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rojo López, Ana M., Ana-Isabel Foulquié-Rubio, Laura Espín López, and Francisco Martínez Sánchez. 2021. “Analysis of speech rhythm and heart rate as indicators of stress on student interpreters.” Perspectives 29(4): 591–607. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saeed, Muhammad Ahmed, Eloy Rodríguez González, Tomasz Korybski, Elena Davitti, and Sabine Braun. 2022. “Connected yet distant: An experimental study into the visual needs of the interpreter in remote simultaneous interpreting.” In Human-Computer Interaction: User Experience and Behavior, ed. by Masaaki Kurosu, 214–232. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saeed, Ahmed M., Eloy Rodríguez González, Tomasz Korybski, Elena Davitti, and Sabine Braun. 2023. “Comparing interface designs to improve RSI platforms: Insights from an experimental study.” In Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Informed Translation and Interpreting Technology 2023, ed. by Constantin Orăsan, et al., 147–156. Naples, Italy. 7–9 July 2023. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Salaets, Heidi, and Geert Brône. 2023. “‘Working at a distance from everybody’: Challenges (and some advantages) in working with video-based interpreting platforms.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 281: 189–209.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seeber, Kilian G., Laura Keller, Rhona Amos, and Sophie Hengl. 2019. “Expectations vs. experience: Attitudes towards video remote conference interpreting.” Interpreting 21(2): 270–304. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seresi, Márta, and Petra Láncos. 2023. “Teamwork in the virtual booth: Conference interpreters’ experiences with RSI platforms.” In Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19, ed. by Kanglong Liu and Andrew K. F. Cheung, 181–196. Singapore: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Setton, Robin, and Andrew Dawrant. 2016. Conference Interpreting: A Trainer’s Guide. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seubert, Sabine. 2019. Visuelle Informationen beim Simultandolmetschen. Berlin: Frank & Timme.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shin, Soo Yun, Ezgi Ulusoy, Kelsey Earle, Gary Bente, and Brandon Van Der Heide. 2022. “The effects of self-viewing in video chat during interpersonal work conversations.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 28(1): zmac028. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spielberger, Charles D. 1983. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Form Y). Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spielberger, Charles D., Richard Gorsuch, Robert E. Lushene, Peter R. Vagg, and Gerard A. Jacobs. 1970. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spielberger, Charles D., Luigi Pedrabissi, and Massimo Santinello. 2012. STAI, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Forma Y: Manuale. Firenze: Giunti OS.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spinolo, Nicoletta, and Agnieszka Chmiel. 2023. AIIC 2020 Research Grant — Final Report.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stachowiak-Szymczak, Katarzyna, and Paweł Korpal. 2019. “Interpreting accuracy and visual processing of numbers in professional and student interpreters: An eye-tracking study.” Across Languages and Cultures 20(2): 235–251. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sun, Sanjun, and Gregory M. Shreve. 2014. “Measuring translation difficulty: An empirical study.” Target 26(1): 98–127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Heuven, Walter J. B., Pawel Mandera, Emmanuel Keuleers, and Marc Brysbaert. 2014. “SUBTLEX-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English.” The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 67(6): 1176–1190. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wrześniewski, Kazimierz, and Tytus Sosnowski. 1983. Inwentarz Stanu i Cechy Lęku (ISCL): Polska Adaptacja STAI — Podręcznik. Olsztyn: Zakład Wytwarzania Pomocy Dydaktycznych.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yuan, Lu, and Binhua Wang. 2023. “Cognitive processing of the extra visual layer of live captioning in simultaneous interpreting: triangulation of eye-tracked process and performance data.” Ampersand 111: 100131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue