Tapping into Consecutive Interpreting Courses: A Comparative Study of Cathartic, Catalytic, and Supportive Interventions
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه تخصصی زبان، فرهنگ، و ترجمه (دوفصلنامه)
Mohammad Fazli
1
,
Ghasem Modarresi
2
1 - Department of English, QU. C., Islamic Azad University, Quchan, Iran
2 - Department of English, QU. C., Islamic Azad University, Quchan, Iran
کلید واژه: Cathartic, Catalytic, Supportive, Engaging, Self-discovery, Self-efficacious, Interpreting,
چکیده مقاله :
Despite the theoretical importance of intervention in interpreting practice, there is a paucity of experimental research into this concept in interpreting courses. Using facilitative interventions, teachers involved in interpreting training can provide scaffolding strategies for students to properly fulfill the demanding tasks of interpreting. The present study, following an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design, mainly aimed to examine the effect of facilitative interventions on consecutive interpreting performance and to explore the students’ reactions to the use of facilitative interventions in consecutive interpreting courses. The sample consisted of 46 homogeneous BA translation-major students in the quantitative phase of the study, and a pool of eight students participated in the qualitative phase of the study. The students were divided into three experimental classes, and each class was exposed to a type of facilitative intervention, including cathartic, catalytic, and supportive. To gather the relevant data, two reliable tests and a semi-structured interview question protocol were used, and to analyze the data, one-way ANOVA and theme-based categorization, including inter-rater and inter-coder reliability, were conducted. The results confirmed that there was a statistically significant difference between the three groups at the p<.05 level, and the effect size was large. The findings showed that cathartic and supportive groups outperformed the catalytic group. Following this, after measuring the inter-coder reliability, seven themes were elicited from the students’ responses to the interview questions, namely novel, challenging, motivating, engaging, self-discovery, self-efficacious, and eustress. Using facilitative interventions, teachers can provide students with actions and techniques through which they can enable students to foster positive emotions and overcome negative emotions regarding interpreting job.
Despite the theoretical importance of intervention in interpreting practice, there is a paucity of experimental research into this concept in interpreting courses. Using facilitative interventions, teachers involved in interpreting training can provide scaffolding strategies for students to properly fulfill the demanding tasks of interpreting. The present study, following an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design, mainly aimed to examine the effect of facilitative interventions on consecutive interpreting performance and to explore the students’ reactions to the use of facilitative interventions in consecutive interpreting courses. The sample consisted of 46 homogeneous BA translation-major students in the quantitative phase of the study, and a pool of eight students participated in the qualitative phase of the study. The students were divided into three experimental classes, and each class was exposed to a type of facilitative intervention, including cathartic, catalytic, and supportive. To gather the relevant data, two reliable tests and a semi-structured interview question protocol were used, and to analyze the data, one-way ANOVA and theme-based categorization, including inter-rater and inter-coder reliability, were conducted. The results confirmed that there was a statistically significant difference between the three groups at the p<.05 level, and the effect size was large. The findings showed that cathartic and supportive groups outperformed the catalytic group. Following this, after measuring the inter-coder reliability, seven themes were elicited from the students’ responses to the interview questions, namely novel, challenging, motivating, engaging, self-discovery, self-efficacious, and eustress. Using facilitative interventions, teachers can provide students with actions and techniques through which they can enable students to foster positive emotions and overcome negative emotions regarding interpreting job.
Abbasian, M., & Modarresi, G. (2022). Tapping into software for oral communication: A comparative study of Adobe Connect and Skype. Journal of Business, Communication & Technology, 1(2), 34-43. https://doi.org/10.56632/bct.2022.1204
AlGhamdi, R. (2024). Exploring the impact of ChatGPT-generated feedback on technical writing skills of computing students: A blinded study. Education and Information Technologies, 29(14), 18901-18926. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12594-2
Alinouri, L., & Badpa, H. (2025). A form-focused translation criticism: A case study of the Persian translation of As I Lay Dying by Dara Bandari. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 7(2), 40-61. https://doi.org/10.71864/lct-2025-1199540
Angelelli, C. (2009). Using a rubric to assess translation ability: Defining the construct. In C. Angelelli, & H. Jacobson, Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies (pp. 13-48). John Benjamins Publication Company.
Arjmandi, A., & Ghafari, M. R. (2025). From adaptation to survival: Metaphoric ecology in translation and language systems. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 8(1), 27-42. https://doi.org/10.71864/lct-2025-1213874
Ashmore, R. (1999). Heron’s intervention framework: An introduction and critique. Mental Health Nursing, 19(1), 24-27.
Azizi, M., & Modarresi, Gh. (2017). The relationship between crystallized intelligence and translation performance of undergraduate translation students. Iranian Journal of Translation Studies, 15(57), 87-102.
Baghery Moghadam, F., & Modarresi, Gh. (2025). Exploring the role of reading emotions, emotion regulation, and translation involvement in translation performance. Forum, 23(2). Online Available. https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.24020.bag
Boos, M., Kobi, M., Elmer, S., & Jäncke, L. (2022). The influence of experience on cognitive load during simultaneous interpretation. Brain and Language, 234, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2022.105185
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge University Press.
Campanella, A. G. (2024). Emotional labor and affective skills in public service interpreting: expanding the competence models. FITISPos International Journal, 11(1), 44-64. https://doi.org/10.37536/FITISPos-IJ.2024.11.1.379
Çayırdağ, N. (2011). Creativity in adulthood. MA Thesis, University of Georgia.
Chen, S. (2017). The construct of cognitive load in interpreting and its measurement. Perspectives, 25(4), 640-657. https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2016
Chen, G., Wang, X., & Wang, L. (2023). Developing assessment literacy among trainee translators: scaffolding self and peer assessment as an intervention. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(6), 888-902. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2142515
Chernov, G. V., Hild, A., & Setton, R. (2004). Inference and anticipation in simultaneous interpreting.
Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts’ characteristics. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.). Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 21-30). Cambridge University Press.
Chiu, T. K., & Hew, T. K. (2018). Factors influencing peer learning and performance in MOOC asynchronous online discussion forum. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(4), 16-28. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3240
Christoffels, I. K., De Groot, A. M., & Kroll, J. F. (2006). Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of memory and language, 54(3), 324-345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004
Cohen, J. W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Darwish, A. (2006). Standards of simultaneous interpreting in live satellite broadcasts: Arabic case study. Translation Watch Quarterly, 2(2), 55-88.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z., & Murphey, T. (2003). Group dynamics in the language classroom (Vol. 10). Cambridge University Press.
Gao, X., Noroozi, O., Gulikers, J., Biemans, H. J., & Banihashem, S. K. (2024). A systematic review of the key components of online peer feedback practices in higher education. Educational Research Review, 42, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100588
Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., Koole, M., & Kappelman, J. (2006). Revisiting methodological issues in transcript analysis: Negotiated coding and reliability. The internet and higher education, 9(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.11.001
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2016). Stimulated recall methodology in applied linguistics and L2 research. Routledge.
Gerver, D. (1975). A psychological approach to simultaneous interpretation. Meta, 20(2), 119-128. https://doi.org/10.7202/002885ar
Gerver, D. (1976). Empirical studies of simultaneous interpretation: A review and a model. In Richard W. Brislin (Ed.), Translation: Applications and research (pp. 165-207). Gardner Press.
Gieshoff, A. C. (2021). The impact of visible lip movements on silent pauses in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting, 23(2), 168-191. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00061.gie
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. John Benjamins Publication Company.
Graham, S. (2011). Self-efficacy and academic listening. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10, 113-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.04.001
Guastaferro, K., & Pfammatter, A. F. (2023). Guidance on selecting a translational framework for intervention development: optimizing interventions for impact. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 7(1), e119. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2023.546
Gunning, R. (1952). The technique of clear writing. McGraw-Hill.
Guo, K., Pan, M., Li, Y., & Lai, C. (2024). Effects of an AI-supported approach to peer feedback on university EFL students’ feedback quality and writing ability. The Internet and Higher Education, 63, 100962. https://doi. org/10. 1016/j.iheduc.2024.100962
Guo, Y., Wang, Y., & Ortega-Martin, J. L. (2023). The impact of blended learning-based scaffolding techniques on learners’ self-efficacy and willingness to communicate. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras, (40), 253-273. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi40.27061
Han, C., & Lu, X. (2023). Can automated machine translation evaluation metrics be used to assess students’ interpretation in the language learning classroom? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(5-6), 1064-1087. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1968915
Han, C., Xiao, R., & Su, W. (2021). Assessing the fidelity of consecutive interpreting: The effects of using source versus target text as the reference material. Interpreting, 23(2), 245-268. https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00058.han
Han, C., & Zhao, X. (2021). Accuracy of peer ratings on the quality of spoken-language interpreting. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(8), 1299-1313. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1855624
Handley, K., Price, M., & Millar, J. (2011). Beyond ‘doing time’: Investigating the concept of student engagement with feedback. Oxford Review of Education, 37(4), 543–560.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/03054 985. 2011. 604951
Harvey, G., Collyer, et al. (2023). Navigating the facilitation journey: a qualitative, longitudinal evaluation of ‘eat walk engage’ novice and experienced facilitators. BMC Health Services Research, 23(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10116-3
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Heron, J. (1976). A six-category intervention analysis. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 4 (2), 143-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069887608256308
Heron, R. P. (1991). The institutionalization of leisure: cultural conflict and hegemony. Society and Leisure, 14(1), 171-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/07053436.1991.10715378
Heron, J. (2001). Helping the client: A creative, practical guide (5th ed.). Sage Publication.
Hild, A. (2015). Discourse comprehension in simultaneous interpreting: The role of expertise and redundancy. In A. Ferreira, & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting (pp. 67-100). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hosseini, H. S., & Modarresi, Gh. (2015). Construction, validation, and application of CALL knowledge scale for EFL learners and its relationship with their L2 writing skills. Foreign Language Research Journal, 5(2), 309-311. https://doi.org/10.22059/jflr.2015.62552
Huang, D. F., Li, F., & Guo, H. (2023). Chunking in simultaneous interpreting: The impact of task complexity and translation directionality on lexical bundles. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1252238
Jalilzadeh, K., Modarresi, G., & Rouhani, H. (2020). A Comparative study of instruction types and reading comprehension for young learners. In H. H. Uysal (Ed.), Political, pedagogical and research insight into early language education (pp. 123-132). Cambridge University Press.
Kashanizadeh, I., Ketabi, S., & Mohsen Shahrokhi, M. (2024). Designing and validating a technological innovation scale for the English as foreign language learning context. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 7(1), 19-42. https://doi.org/ 10.71864/lct-2024-1129883
Khorami Nia, F., & Modarresi, Gh. (2019). A Rasch-based validation of the evaluation rubric for consecutive interpreting performance. Sendebar, 30, 221-244. https://doi.org/10.30827/sendebar.v30i0.8512
Khorsand, M., & Modarresi, Gh. (2023). The relationship between teachers’ emotions, strokes and academic achievement: the case of BA English-major students. Language and Translation Studies, 56(2), 71-107. https://doi.org/10.22067/lts.2023.81620.1179
Koltovskaia, S. (2020). Student engagement with automated written corrective feedback (AWCF) provided by Grammarly: A multiple case study. Assessing Writing, 44, 100450. https:// doi. org/ 10.1016/j. asw. 2020. 100450
Lai, W. (2012). Concept-based foreign language pedagogy: Teaching the Chinese temporal system. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University. University Park, PA.
Laviosa, S. (2008). Translation. In R. B. Kaplan, The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 474-489). Oxford University Press.
Lee, J. (2017). Professional interpreters’ job satisfaction and relevant factors: A case study of trained interpreters in South Korea. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 12(3), 427-448. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.12.3.04lee
Loerscher, W. (1997). Process analytical approach to translation and implications for translations. The Kent State University Press.
Mahmoodzadeh, K., & Razavi, M. S. M. (2014). Interpreter-Training-Specific Techniques: A Didactic Approach. Iranian Journal of Translation Studies, 12(46), 1-15.
Masek, A., Salleh, K. M., & Alias, M. (2022). A hybrid facilitation model for inexperienced students via integration of teacher-centered and student-centered roles. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 35(2), 156-164. http://dx.doi.org/10.16920/jeet/2022/v35is2/22126
McMahon, A., Seery, C., Moorhead, S., & O'Brien, G. (2023). Analysis of supervisory interventions in a transdisciplinary youth mental health service. Psychological Services, 20(2), 256-266. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/ser0000695
Mellinger, C. D., & Jiménez, L. G. (2019). Challenges and opportunities for heritage language learners in interpreting courses in the US context. Revista Signos. Estudios de Lingüística, 52(101), 950-974. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342019000300950.
Méndez, F. Z., Ingles, C. J., & Hidalgo, M. D. (2001). The shortened Spanish version of the personal report of confidence as speaker: Reliability and validity in adolescent population. Behavioral Psychology 12(1), 25-42.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
Modarresi, Gh. (2021). The effect of dictogloss vs. debating on L2 writing proficiency: A mixed-methods study. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 40(4), 121-160. https://doi.org/ 10.22099/jtls.2021.39939.2954.
Modarresi, Gh. (2019). Developing and validating involvement in translation scale and its relationship with translation ability. Forum: International Journal of Interpreting and Translation, 17(2), 225-248. https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.18015.mod
Modarresi, G. (2009). Collocational errors of Iranian EFL learners in written English. TELL, 3(1), 135- 154.
Modarresi, G., & Ghoreyshi, S. V. (2018). Student-centered corrections of translations and translation accuracy: A case of BA translation students. Translation Studies, 15(60), 11-28.
Modarresi, Gh., & Jalilzadeh, K. (2020). A comparative study of two ways of presentation of listening assessment: Moving towards internet-based assessment. Language Teaching and Educational Research, 3(2), 176-194. https://doi.org/10.35207/later.742121
Modarresi, Gh., Jalilzadeh, K., & Zolfaghary, R. (2020). Interpretation strategies and interpretation performance in interlingual and bilingual subtitling: A case of Iranian BA translation students. REiLA: Journal of Research and Innovation in Language, 2(3), 109-120. https://doi.org/1031849/reila.v2i3.5589.
Modarresi, Gh., Jalilzadeh, K., Coombe, K., & Nooshab, A. (2021). Validating a test to measure translation teachers’ assessment literacy. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(4), 1503-1511. https://doi.org/10.22132/tel.2014.53816.
Negueruela, E., & Lantolf, J.P. (2006). Concept-based pedagogy and the acquisition of L2 Spanish. In R. M. Salaberry & B. A. Lafford (Eds.), The art of teaching Spanish: Second language acquisition from research to praxis (pp. 79-102). Georgetown University Press.
Neunzig, W., & Tanqueiro, H. (2005). Teacher feedback in online education for trainee translators. Meta, 50(4). https://doi.org/10.7202/019873ar
Niranjana, T. (2023). Siting translation: History, post-structuralism, and the colonial context. University of California Press.
Pietrzak, P. (2014). Towards effective feedback to translation students. Intralinea, 1-9. https://www.intralinea.org/specials/article/2095.
Pöchhacker, F. (2023). History, community, accessibility: Interpreting studies extended. In A. Biernacka, & W. Figiel (Eds.), New insights into interpreting studies: Technology, society and access (pp. 17-36). Peter Lang.
Pöchhacker, F. (2004). Introducing interpreting studies. Routledge.
Pöchhacker, F. (2011). Quality assurance in simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup & A. Lindegaard (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 2 (pp. 233-242). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Rahmanpanah, H. (2023). The gravitational model of language availability and interpreting: A critical review. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 6(1), 163-176. https://doi.org/ 10.71864/lct-2024-1123077
Rahmanpanah, H. (2022). Consecutive interpreting in a nutshell. Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 4(2), 46-65. https://doi.org/10.30495/LCT.2022.1949877.1051
Riccardi, A. (2011). Language-specific strategies in simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup & V. Appel (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 3: New horizons (pp. 213-222). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Riccardi A., Marinuzzi G., & Zecchin S. (1998). Interpretation and stress. The Interpreters' Newsletter 8, 93-106.
Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT journal, 59(1), 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cci003
Rouhani, H., & Modarresi, Gh. (2023). The role of translation-based, meaning-based, and hint-based instructions in vocabulary acquisition: A mixed-methods study. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 15(1), 83-100. https://doi.org/10.22111/ijals.2023.38276.2156.
Schiavi, G. (1996). There is always a teller in the tale. Target, 8(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1075/target.8.1.02sch
Setton, R. (1999). Simultaneous interpretation. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Sha, L., Wang, X., Ma, S., & Mortimer, T. A. (2022). Investigating the effectiveness of anonymous online peer feedback in translation technology teaching. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 16(3), 325-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2022.2097984
Shahrokhi, M., & Nikbakht, L. (2024). Investigating the association among Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ critical thinking, L2 grit, problem solving, and resilience: A structural equation modelling. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 14(3), 385-401. https://doi.org/10.22059/jflr.2024.379089.1140
Shen, B., Bai, B., & Xue, W. (2020). The effects of peer assessment on learner autonomy: an empirical study in a Chinese college English writing class. Student Educational Evaluation, 64,100821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.100821
Shore, S. (2001). Teaching translation. In E. Steiner, & C. Yallop (Eds.), Exploring translation and multilingual text production: Beyond content (pp. 249-276). Walter de Gruyter.
Sistani, H. (2024). Review of critical applied linguistics: A critical re-introduction (Pennycook, 2021). Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation, 6(2), 46-51. https://doi.org/10.71864/lct-2024-1122701
Sloan, G. (2006). Clinical supervision in mental health nursing. Whurr Publishers.
Sloan, G., & Watson, H. (2002). Clinical supervision models for nursing: Structure, research and limitations. Nursing Standard, 17(4), 41-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.7748/ns2002.10.17.4.41.c3279
Vandergrift, L. (2003). Orchestrating strategy use: Toward a model of the skilled second language listener. Language Learning, 53(4), 463-496. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00232
Wang, K., and Han, C. (2013). Accomplishment in the multitude of counselors: peer feedback in translation training. Translation & Interpretation, 5, 62-75.https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.105202.2013.a05
Wang, Y., & Wang, S. (2024). The joint roles of emotion regulation and teacher support in shaping academic engagement among Chinese graduate students majoring in foreign languages: A qualitative study. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 93-111. https://doi.org/10.30466/ijltr.2024.121578
Washbourne, K. (2014). Beyond error marking: Written corrective feedback for a dialogic pedagogy in translator training. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8(2), 240-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.908554
Wei, W., Yu, Y., & Gao, G. (2022). Investigating learners’ changing expectations on learning experience in a MOOC of professional translation and interpreter training. SAGE Open, 12(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221134577
Wen, Z., Teng, M. F., Han, L., & Zeng, Y. (2022). Working memory models and measures in language and bilingualism research: Integrating cognitive and affective perspectives. Brain Sciences, 12(6), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12060729
Woang, J. P. (2021). Translation activities on oral translation and written translation. Applied Translation, 15(1), 28-38. https://doi.org/10.51708/apptrans.v15n1.1402
Xing, S., & Yang, J. (2023). The Impact of interpreting training experience on the attentional networks and their dynamics. Brain Sciences, 13(9), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci13091306
Xu, Q., & Ouyang, Q. (2023). Unleashing the power of meta-knowledge: Towards cumulative learning in interpreter training. Interpreting and Society, 3(2), 169-194. https://doi.org/10.1177/27523810231193337
Xu, S., Su, Y., & Liu, K. (2025). Investigating student engagement with AI‑driven feedback in translation revision: A mixed‑methods study. Education and Information Technologies. Online available. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13457-0
Yu, Y., Ji, Z., Han, J., & Zhang, Z. (2020). Episode-based prototype generating network for zero-shot learning. Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 14035-14044.
Zhu, X., & Aryadoust, V. (2022). A synthetic review of cognitive load in distance interpreting: Toward an explanatory model. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.899718
