https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 7, 2025
17
BOUNDARIES OF SIMULTANEOUS INTERPRETATION RESEARCH: FOCUSING
ON PROFESSIONAL VS. STUDENT INTERPRETERS
Xolmatova Malikaxon Ilyosjon kizi
Abstract
: This thesis examines the boundaries of research on simultaneous interpretation (SI),
with a particular focus on comparing professional interpreters and students in training. The study
reviews existing literature to highlight key differences in cognitive processing, performance
strategies, and stress management between these two groups. Professional interpreters, with their
years of experience, tend to demonstrate greater efficiency in handling cognitive load,
multitasking, and maintaining accuracy under pressure. In contrast, student interpreters often
face challenges related to cognitive overload, slower reaction times, and less refined coping
strategies. The article also explores how training programs can better bridge the gap between
students and professionals, emphasizing the importance of domain-specific knowledge, real-
world practice, and the development of adaptive strategies for managing stress and fatigue. By
defining the research boundaries between these two groups, this paper contributes to a deeper
understanding of how experience shapes the skills and techniques necessary for successful SI.
Additionally, it provides insights for future research on interpreter training and cognitive
development in SI.
Keywords
: simultaneous interpretation (SI), cognitive processing, performance strategies, stress
management
Introduction
Simultaneous interpretation (SI) is a complex cognitive task that requires interpreters to listen,
process, and translate speech in real-time. The field of SI has evolved through research into
cognitive processing, stress management, and performance strategies, with a growing interest in
understanding the differences between professional interpreters and students in training. These
two groups exhibit distinct levels of proficiency, particularly in areas such as cognitive load
management, multitasking, and accuracy. This article aims to explore the boundaries of research
between professional and student interpreters, emphasizing how experience shapes interpreting
skills and how training can bridge the gap.
Cognitive Load and Processing Differences
Cognitive load theory is central to understanding the performance differences between
professionals and students in SI. Professional interpreters, due to their experience, tend to
develop effective strategies for managing the simultaneous processing of listening and speaking.
Gile (2009) highlights that professionals have a more refined ability to allocate cognitive
resources efficiently, which allows them to maintain a high level of accuracy despite the rapid
pace of speech. In contrast, student interpreters often struggle with cognitive overload, especially
when dealing with complex or fast-paced content. A study by Moser-Mercer (2003)
demonstrated that professional interpreters are better at multitasking because they have
internalized many of the processes involved in SI, reducing the cognitive load of each task.
Student interpreters, however, tend to focus heavily on word-for-word translation, which can
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 7, 2025
18
lead to a breakdown in processing when faced with difficult speech. This difference in cognitive
load management is crucial to understanding how professionals consistently deliver high-quality
interpretation even under challenging conditions.
Simultaneous interpreting is highly stressful, and both professional and student interpreters face
the challenge of managing anxiety and fatigue during assignments. However, the way they
handle these stressors differs significantly. Research by Jiménez Ivars and Pinazo (2001) shows
that professional interpreters develop effective coping mechanisms, such as breaking speech into
meaningful chunks and employing selective omission when necessary, which reduces mental
strain. In contrast, student interpreters tend to experience higher levels of anxiety, which can
negatively affect their performance (Andres, 2002).
The ability to manage stress is also linked to fatigue, as interpreters are required to maintain
focus for extended periods. Gile’s (2009) effort model emphasizes that fatigue plays a major role
in performance decline, particularly in students who are less accustomed to the mental demands
of SI. Professionals typically work in teams and alternate every 20-30 minutes to avoid cognitive
burnout, while students may find it difficult to sustain performance even for short periods due to
inexperience with stress and fatigue management.
One of the most significant challenges in simultaneous interpretation is balancing accuracy with
speed. Professional interpreters, with years of practice, are able to quickly grasp the speaker’s
meaning and render a translation that not only captures the content but also conveys the tone and
intent (Riccardi, 1998). This is often a result of their ability to process large chunks of
information and make sense of it at a conceptual level, rather than focusing solely on individual
words or phrases.
Student interpreters, on the other hand, tend to prioritize accuracy over speed, often resulting in
slower reaction times and an inability to keep up with the speaker (Setton & Dawrant, 2016).
This mismatch between accuracy and speed is one of the primary reasons for performance
differences between professionals and students. According to Shlesinger (2000), professional
interpreters develop a sense of strategic omission and paraphrasing that allows them to convey
the most critical information without sacrificing the flow of interpretation, a skill that students
usually lack.
Bridging the Gap: Implications for Interpreter Training
Understanding the boundaries between professional and student interpreters has important
implications for interpreter training programs. Current research suggests that training programs
must go beyond linguistic skills to include strategies for managing cognitive load, stress, and
fatigue. As professionals demonstrate, domain-specific knowledge is critical for accurate and
timely interpretation (Pöchhacker, 2004). Therefore, training programs should incorporate more
specialized content from fields such as law, medicine, and technology, allowing students to
practice in a variety of real-world scenarios.
Furthermore, incorporating stress management techniques and cognitive flexibility exercises into
training can help students build resilience. Research by Timarová et al. (2015) indicates that
student interpreters benefit from training that simulates real-life pressures, such as working in
fast-paced environments and managing challenging content. By bridging the gap between
theoretical knowledge and practical application, interpreter training programs can better prepare
students for the demands of professional SI.
While considerable progress has been made in understanding the differences between
professional and student interpreters, there is still much to explore. Future research should focus
on longitudinal studies that track the cognitive and performance development of students as they
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 7, 2025
19
transition to professionals. Additionally, the impact of emerging technologies, such as computer-
assisted interpreting tools, on both student and professional interpreters warrants further
investigation. Exploring how these tools may influence cognitive load, accuracy, and stress
management will be essential in shaping the future of interpreter training.
Conclusion
The boundaries of research on simultaneous interpretation, particularly in comparing
professional and student interpreters, reveal critical insights into cognitive processing, stress
management, and performance strategies. While professionals benefit from years of experience
that enhance their ability to manage cognitive load, stress, and accuracy, students often face
significant challenges in these areas. By understanding these differences, interpreter training
programs can be better equipped to address the needs of students and help them develop the
skills necessary for successful interpretation. Future research should continue to explore how
experience, training, and technology intersect to shape the evolving field of simultaneous
interpretation.
References
:
1.
Andres, D. (2002). Conference interpreting and stress. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger
(Eds.), The interpreting studies reader (pp. 199-210). Routledge.
2.
Gile, D. (2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training (2nd
ed.). John Benjamins.
3.
Jiménez Ivars, A., & Pinazo, D. (2001). Interpreters' stress and burnout. Interpreting, 6(2),
175-192.
4.
Moser-Mercer, B. (2003). Remote interpreting: Issues of multi-sensory integration in a
multilingual task. Meta: Journal des traducteurs, 48(1-2), 197-207.
5.
Pöchhacker, F. (2004). Introducing interpreting studies. Routledge.
6.
Riccardi, A. (1998). Interpreting strategies and creativity. In A. Beylard-Ozeroff, J.
Králová, & B. Moser-Mercer (Eds.), Translators' strategies and creativity (pp. 171-179). John
Benjamins.
7.
Setton, R., & Dawrant, A. (2016). Conference interpreting: A trainer’s guide. John
Benjamins.
8.
Shlesinger, M. (2000). Corpus-based interpreting studies as an offshoot of corpus-based
translation studies. Meta, 45(4), 559-570.
9.
Timarová, S., Vasić, J., & Salaets, H. (2015). Simultaneous interpreting and working
memory capacity. Interpreting, 17(1), 1-29.
