Trust and the Relationship with Interpreting as a Profession

Trust and the Relationship with Interpreting as a Profession

ASL Version: https://youtu.be/0xrLoR8Okxo?si=SfxcNkBBzfFwX2rR

Alyssa Alpers, Western Oregon University

Alyssa Alpers is a Master of Interpreting Studies: Theory student at Western Oregon University. She currently is working to gain experience and knowledge as a working ASL-English interpreter in post-secondary, theater, and community settings. In addition to her work as an interpreter and a student, Alyssa also works in the DeafBlind community as a co-navigator where she continues to better her skills in co-navigating and improve her use of Protactile Language. In the future, Alyssa hopes to become a certified, experienced, culturally knowledgeable and trustworthy interpreter who serves both the Deaf and DeafBlind communities.impact on communities.

Abstract

An essential component of a well-oiled interpreter and consumer team is the consumer ’s ability to trust the interpreter. It is important that the interpreter works to gain the trust of the consumer for an effective and functional interpretation; it is crucial that the interpreter values that trust and maintains it. Consumers often need to judge and determine whether they can trust an interpreter in a short time frame. Through various literary sources, this article works to put forth and describe the literature that exists surrounding trust relationships. In addition, this article concludes what makes an interpreter trusting and how interpreters can develop skills to become a trusted, knowledgeable interpreter.

Keywords: swift, reciprocal, trust, interpreters, deaf, indexes of trustworthiness

1 For this Action Research Project, the term Deaf is comprehensive and includes; d/Deaf, Hard of Hearing, DeafBlind, and DeafDisabled individuals.

Introduction

When someone thinks about the best moments of a person’s life, like giving birth to their child, getting married, or getting a promotion at work, most people wish to have their loved ones and friends near to celebrate. The same can be suggested for the lowest moments of a person’s life, like burying a loved one or getting let go from their job, most people wish to have their loved ones and friends near to lean on. For the Deaf1 community, these highs and lows of life, have a tendency to include an interpreter to facilitate the communication between the parties who do not share the same language.

In order to accurately facilitate communication, the relationship between the interpreter and consumer must portray trust from the consumer. In order to do that, interpreters must navigate and understand how to accurately and appropriately create trusting relationships with consumers. As a result, interpreters must become knowledgeable about the types of trust relationships that exist and learn how to develop tools to become trustworthy interpreters.

Literature Review

There are two major kinds of trust that Deaf consumers and interpreters display, the first is reciprocal trust and it can be described as a relationship of trust that has been built over time through continued interaction, a formation of familiarity, and shared experience (Reinhardt, 2021). The second type of trust, swift trust, is temporary and developed between the consumer and interpreter at a faster rate and is built on a mutual schema of worldview and knowledge of specific interpreted interactions (Reinhardt, 2021). According to Napier et al. (2020), Sin and Jones (2013, as cited by Napier et al.) there are common traits among interpreters qualifying them as trustworthy that consumers look for when developing both reciprocal and swift trust relationships. These traits consist of accuracy, respectability, benevolence, competency, and the ability to be in control, and are called the “indexes of trustworthiness”.

The indexes of trustworthiness are helpful for consumers to judge an interpreter’s ability to represent them in an accurate way (Napier et al., 2020). However, in most cases, trust given by a Deaf consumer is conditional and subjective. Across the community there are a variety of different qualities, abilities, and traits that consumers look for in an interpreter to be able to trust them (Edwards et al., 2006). There is also an emphasis on relationship and human connection being mitigating factors of trustworthiness (Reinhardt, 2021).

Reinhardt (2021) offered varying strategies to give interpreters the tools they need to navigate and build swift trust relationships with consumers (Reinhardt, 2021). The results of Reinhardt’s (2021) study showed only half of the participants in her study succeeded in forming swift trust relationships, even though most of the interpreters reported that they thought they were successful in finding common ground. As a result, Reinhardt (2021) first recommended that interpreters, especially in instances of high stakes, should initiate a preparation meeting before the interpreted event to discuss the event and form a connection. In addition, Reinhardt (2021) also recommended that interpreters should learn to recognize the different types of trust and work to develop skills and qualities in the indexes of trustworthiness (Napier et al., 2020). Lastly, Reinhardt (2021) described the results of her study showing when interpreters and Deaf consumers took a few minutes before an event to make a connection, a swift trust relationship started to form.

There has been a continuous “erosion of trust” between interpreters and the Deaf community as a result of mistrust and the power imbalance in interpreted interactions (Foster, 2018). Foster (2018) recommended that interpreters work to confront their privilege in order to build reciprocal trust relationships with members of the Deaf community. In addition, Foster (2018) stated that interpreters can incorporate listening with intent, develop humility and responsibility, and grow from mistakes.

To continue to work to build reciprocal relationships with consumers, Butler (2016) explained interpreters need to understand the weight of working as an interpreter and that interpreters should hold their title with honor. Butler (2016) stated that the behaviors that interpreters exhibit both in an interpreted space and outside in day-to-day life, will ultimately shine a light on the interpreter’s integrity and trustworthiness. Interpreters, in order to become more trustworthy, should display a degree of professionalism (Butler, 2016). Butler (2016) listed four suggestions that could help ensure that interpreters stay professional and become more trustworthy. First, Butler (2016) suggested that interpreters should be considerate of their actions and cognizant of their behavior on social media. Second, Butler (2016) recommended that interpreters be wary of “intergroup bias” and unconscious behaviors that work to group people together to place blame (Butler, 2016). The third and fourth suggestions focused on developing humility and empathy as an interpreter and putting thoughts into actions that are positive in nature. In closing, Butler (2016) stated “being worthy of trust boils down to one simple choice: committing to a higher standard of professionalism.”

Discussion

As indicated above, swift trust and reciprocal trust relationships differ in how they develop in many ways, but both types of trust relationships rely on the indexes of trustworthiness (Napier et al., 2020) if the relationships of trust are going to continue. It can be deduced that in order to become a more trustworthy interpreter, it is critical that novice and experienced interprets alike work to build the indexes of trustworthiness (accuracy, respectability, benevolence, and competency) (Napier et al., 2020) within themselves and their practice.

While both trust relationships rely on similar foundations, they differ in how they are achieved; however, a possible question to be considered is whether swift trust relationships form into reciprocal trust relationships. As mentioned above, Reinhardt (2021) found that the participants of her study were more likely to form swift trust relationships if they were able to connect with one another before the interpretation started. This shows that a connection was made on either schema of worldview or knowledge about the specific interpreted interaction (Reinhardt, 2021).

If there was indeed a swift trust relationship formed, there must have been an initial good first impression made by the consumer. This is further supported by Human et al. (2012) who discovered that in order to continue relationships after the initial meeting, first impressions need to be accurate. This can apply to interpreter and consumer relationships, if the interpreter evokes an accurate first impression by displaying humility as well as accuracy and honesty about their skills. It is possible that swift trust relationships can develop into reciprocal trust relationships.

As a novice interpreter who is beginning to enter the interpreting profession, I plan to use this information on swift and reciprocal trust relationships and the recommendations to enhance my practice and become a more trustworthy interpreter. I am in the process of developing my orientation preceding interpreted interactions (Jones, 2019) with the goal in mind of portraying an accurate first impression in order to create a swift trust relationship. Since swift trust relies on a mutual schema of worldview and shared knowledge of the interpreted interaction, my concern is that I will have trouble forming swift trust because I do not yet have much experience of real-world interpreted interactions. I hope to continue to build and develop the indexes of trustworthiness (Napier et al., 2020) through becoming familiar with my interpreting process, reflecting honestly, and experiencing a wide variety of interpreted interactions. After having gained experience in the interpreting field, I hope to have created a reputation as a trustworthy and professional interpreter. In addition, I hope to create more relationships with Deaf consumers in the area that I am interpreting. My assumption is the more relationships I make and the longer I continue to practice interpreting, I will have more reciprocal trust relationships.

In regard to the interpreting profession as a whole, Reinhardt (2021) explained the potential effects of interpreters understanding swift and reciprocal trust relationships and how to build them. Reinhardt (2021) described that on a macro-level, Deaf consumers’ perspectives on interpreters might become more positive and, in addition, choose to find common ground and cultivate more discussions. In addition, when interpreters hold the indexes of trustworthiness (Napier et. al., 2020) and have mutual schemas with Deaf consumers regarding trust, interpreting as a profession can become more Deaf-centered.

Conclusion

The tools and information reported in this article are recommended for interpreters, in general. For future research, I would like to see how swift and reciprocal trust relationships relate to culturally responsive interpreting. I am curious to know if swift trust relationships are indeed developed more quickly if the consumer and interpreter share similar cultural experiences and backgrounds. As stated by Napier et al. (2020) in regard to interpreting as a profession and working with Deaf interpreters “we mediate language, culture, and identities” (2021, p. 90).

Overall, swift trust and reciprocal trust relationships are integral to interpreting as a profession. In addition, the development of understanding the different types of relationships that exist and developing traits that will aid in the creation of those relationships are essential to interpreter education. Through research and experience, interpreters can create a toolbox to effectively create trusted relationships within the Deaf community. When more interpreters are equipped with these concepts of trust, the potential for Deaf community members to have access to trusted interpreters for intimate moments in their lives increases.

References

Butler, W. (2016). Building Trust: Accepting the Mantle of Sign Language Interpreter. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lX4HVqMpCM.

Edwards, A., C., & Temple, B. (2006). Interpreting Trust: Abstract and Personal Trust for People who Need Interpreters to Access Services. Sociological Research Online, 11(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5153/ sro.1077

Foster, M. (2018, October 2). Erosion of Trust: Sign Language Interpreters and Hearing Privilege. https://www.deafinterpreteracademy.com/uploads/1/2/1/5/121579022/erosion_of_trust.pdf

Human, L. J., Sandstrom, G. M., Biesanz, J. C., & Dunn, E. W. (2013). Accurate First Impressions Leave a Lasting Impression: The Long-Term Effects of Distinctive Self-Other Agreement on Relationship Development. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(4), 395–402. https://doi. org/10.1177/1948550612463735

Jones, C. (2019) “Orientation to the Interpreted Interaction: An Examination of Consumer Perception,” Journal of Interpretation: Vol. 27: Iss. 1, Article 2.

Napier, J., Skinner, R., Young, A., & Oram, R. (2019). Mediating identities: Sign language interpreter perceptions on trust and representation. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 14(1), 75–95. https:// doi.org/10.1558/jalpp.36014

Reinhardt, L. R. (2021). Swift trust formation: Experiences of deaf consumers and Asl-English interpreters. ProQuest Dissertation Publishing.