Interpreters in investigative interviewing contexts

Evans, Jacqueline R.; Shaffer, Sarah; Walsh, David

doi:10.4324/9780429326530-10

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They should be able to report in their first language to capture the most accurate account ( Raver et al, 2023 ). Moreover, if a victim is forced to report using a language in which they are not proficient, it could impact the accuracy of the report via errors in translation ( Evans et al, 2019 ) or it could deter a victim from using the application.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical analysis of gender-based violence reporting and evidence building applications (GBVxTech) for capturing memory reports

Stevens,

Bennett,

Cotton

et al. 2024

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionGender-based violence (GBV) is under-reported to the authorities owing to the stigma, shame, and fear of reprisal that surrounds these crimes. To address this, there has been an influx of technologies, including mobile phone and online applications that allow victim-survivors (hereafter, victims) to document and report GBV (hereafter referred to as GBVxTech). We critically analysed the extent to which GBVxTech applications align with the scientific knowledge base on gathering accounts of crimes from victims and witnesses.MethodsWe identified 41 reporting and evidence building applications from around the world but found many (n = 19) were no longer accessible. A total of 13 applications met the study criteria and were available for download. We evaluated each application on how well its design and features align with established minimum best practice standards for gathering complete and accurate accounts from witnesses and victims, such as the pre-interview instructions (e.g., setting ground rules), questioning approach (e.g., using open-ended questions), and the adequacy of security features (e.g., password protection).Results and DiscussionWe found most applications employ open questions, encourage victims to report information in an independent voice, and seek to elicit information pertinent to a criminal investigation. None of the applications use leading questions. However, most applications do not establish ground rules, and many use forced-choice questions, do not time stamp the information gathered, or document when users change their answers. Many applications have limited security features, potentially compromising users’ safety. Further, some applications do not provide information about how to use the app, an informed consent procedure, or data usage information. We discuss the findings and offer recommendations for future GBVxTech development.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical analysis of gender-based violence reporting and evidence building applications (GBVxTech) for capturing memory reports

Stevens,

Bennett,

Cotton

et al. 2024

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Interpreted Police Interviews: A Review of Contemporary Research

Goodman‐Delahunty

Martschuk

Hale

et al. 2020

Advances in Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criminal justice proceedings are high-stakes settings in which native English speakers have difficulty negotiating the legal process, let alone persons with no or limited English proficiency. Increasingly, law enforcement interviewers are required to rely on interpreters (Mulayim & Lai, 2017;Shaffer & Evans, 2018). However, the mere presence of an interpreter does not guarantee accurate interpreting. If the interpretation is inaccurate, evidence can be misconstrued, affecting assessments of witness veracity and credibility. This can compromise the right of the parties to a fair trial and lead to wrongful convictions or acquittals, costly appeals, and retrials. The scale of the problem has been recognized by members of the judiciary, who for many years have complained that the poor quality of interpreters is detrimental to the court's ability to perform its duties (Hale, 2011). In response to calls for improvement, the European Parliament, the Council of Europe (1950), and comparable bodies in other jurisdictions mandated that interpreters be fully competent for the task assigned (Hertog, 2015). The assigned tasks include interpreting in the investigative phases of the criminal justice process, including suspect and witness interrogations and intelligence interviews. In different jurisdictions, the terminology applied to law enforcement interviews varies. In Australia and the United Kingdom (UK), the

show abstract