Lost in translation? Issues of content validity in interpreter-mediated aphasia assessments

Abstract

In many parts of the world, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are frequently called upon to assess aphasia in bilingual speakers, or in speakers of languages of which they have little or no knowledge. One of the strategies that SLPs employ in these situations is to involve an interpreter in the assessment process. Three authentic interpreter-mediated aphasia assessments were analysed for the present study, which aimed to determine the degree to which the content validity of the individual tests was compromised in the process of their administration through an interpreter. Findings reveal that content validity was frequently weakened either at the point of administration of the test or at the point at which responses were reported back by the interpreter to the SLP. Based on these findings, it is argued that the conduct of interpreter-mediated aphasia assessments needs to be fundamentally re-thought to take account of the limitations inherent in the interpreting process. To this end, this study presents a number of practical recommendations for the involvement of interpreters in aphasia assessments, with a view to making optimal use of existing assessment materials and enhancing the quality of diagnostic information to emerge from such clinical sessions.

Assessment of a Samoan–English speaker with bilingual aphasia: “it’s hard”

“…Factors that seemed to influence the team to function less effectively included the First Interpreter having separate conversations in Samoan with the FM during the language assessment and a poor seating arrangement. The findings of this study add to previous investigations that highlight the importance of more information sharing between interpreters and speech-language therapists including pre-and post-assessment briefings and the provision of information about the nature of the assessment process, the nature of communication disorders, and possible client errors (Kambanaros & Van Steenbrugge, 2004;Roger & Code, 2011).…”

Speech pathology services for people with aphasia: what is the current practice in Singapore?

“…Although current evidence supports the provision of unilingual aphasia treatment in either the first (L1) or second (L2) languages [31], the myriad of languages spoken may mean that speech pathologists in Singapore may not be able to provide treatment in either of the client's languages. While it is recognized to be good practice to have interpreters in managing individuals from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds [32,33], interpreter-mediated sessions have been found to be prone to content validity issues [34].…”

Speech pathologists and professional interpreters managing culturally and linguistically diverse adults with communication disorders: a systematic review

“…Where language(s) spoken was reported, speech pathologist participants were mainly monolingual ( n = 220), compared with only 54 multilingual speech pathologist participants. Five studies reported that the interpreter participants involved were professional interpreters (Kambanaros and van Steenbrugge , Knoph , Koumanidi Knoph , Merlini and Favaron , Roger and Code ), while two survey studies mentioned family members being used as untrained interpreters (Hersh et al . , Roger et al .…”

“…() had reportedly interpreted for CALD adults with aphasia before. Additionally, the speech pathologist participants in Roger and Code () reported that working with interpreters was ‘not an uncommon event’ for them. Similarly, most studies did not report on previous training received by speech pathologist and interpreter participants on how to work together.…”