Accuracy and Note-taking Preferences

This study showed that accuracy was significantly lower in the FSR setting. For the students (regardless of Y1 or Y2) who scored higher in the FSR setting, it was found that accuracy may have been enhanced by more horizontal lines.

5.2.1 FSR’s impact on accuracy

First, the results from the quantitative analysis in this study showed that the student interpreters scored lower in the FSR setting. That is, the student interpreters rendered fewer messages correctly when the SR was faster. This finding is in full agreement with

previous studies about FSR and interpreting performance (Barghout, Rosendo & García, 2015; Chang, 2009; Gerver, 2002 [1969]; Korpal, 2012; Pio, 2003; Ribas, 2012; Wu et al., 2010).

Secondly, the qualitative analysis showed that the majority of the participants felt an impact of FSR on accuracy. Reasons that were reported included listening

comprehension problems, unhelpful notes, and lack of confidence. Similar to Chang’s (2009) suggestion that processing capacity overload caused by FSR may happen in any Efforts in the SI process, it seems that all the Efforts in the first phase of CI were under the influence of FSR as well. In fact, it was found in this study that the reason for a compromised note-taking and memory performance may be rooted in comprehension problems. That is to say, FSR’s impact in note-taking and memory might be indirect. In fact, it was found in the qualitative analysis that if a message was not understood or not even heard, it would be very difficult for the message to be passed on to the Note-taking Effort and the Short-term memory operations Effort, which, again, corresponds to the observation in Wu et al (2010).

It is also worth mentioning that several student interpreters suggested nervousness or lack of confidence as the reason influencing their accuracy. This shows that FSR affects not only the cognitive efficiency but also the nerves of the interpreter, similar to what was described in Lu and Liao (2012). As Gile (2009) also contended that

subjective factors such as high levels of stress may lead to a disorganized management of processing capacity, we may assume that FSR contributed to increased stress levels among the subjects, thus undermining their accuracy.

In sum, the results from this study show that the drop in accuracy of the student interpreters when dealing with FSR was not necessarily due to note-taking problems alone. Even when there were note-taking problems, it was very likely that the problems were only symptoms of other deeply rooted problems, e.g., poor listening

comprehension, or nervousness.

5.2.2 More segmentation for better accuracy

Among all the note-taking preferences investigated in this study, only one was shown to have the potential for influencing CI accuracy according to the statistical test.

The number of horizontal lines, which served to segment ideas, was revealed in the quantitative analysis to be significantly different in the two score groups. The student interpreters who scored higher in the FSR setting had more horizontal lines in their notes compared with those who scored lower. This result corresponded with Liu (2010), in which more separation marks for segmentation was found to be related to better accuracy. Since Liu used professional interpreters as participants, it is possible that this relation between segmentation and accuracy is valid for both professional and student interpreters. However, more research is needed to support the theory.

Drawing horizontal lines is one of the ways to make spacing arrangements on notes, according to Liu (2008). The purpose of spacing arrangements is to display the messages in the speech in its logical order (Gillies, 2005; Liu, 2008). This result from the quantitative analysis also corresponds to findings from the qualitative analysis where the student interpreters highlighted the importance of securing the structure and

were found in this study to be the most important note-taking strategy to secure more messages, while listening comprehension was shown to be the first and foremost area to pay attention to in FSR occasions. This is because a message needs to be heard and understood first before the interpreter can apply any note-taking skills.

Of course, segmentation is only one of the ways to make spacing arrangements on notes. Other proposed methods include verticalization, indentation, and superposition of messages (Liu, 2008), which were difficult to be quantified considering the capacity of this study. Thus, it remains unknown whether the student interpreters in this study who scored higher in the FSR setting also used more of these spacing management methods in the note-taking process. Nevertheless, some student interpreters remarked that FSR made it very difficult to stop for even a while to consider how to verticalize or indent messages. Therefore, compared with verticalization or indentation, perhaps

segmentation is a strategy possibly more achievable in the face of FSR. In addition, compared with the SSR setting, the student interpreters drew fewer horizontal lines per proposition in the FSR setting in this study. It is possible that accuracy would improve if the interpreter use segmentation more to remind them of the start and end of ideas.

Perhaps this could serve as a good visual cue to remind them of the structure of the speech.

Despite the fact that segmentation is viewed as a good note-taking strategy, validated by past research and this study, the usage of horizontal lines differs from one interpreter to another. In addition, in order to make good use of any spacing

arrangements, the interpreter has to first have a clear understanding of the speech, according to the remarks of the student interpreters in this study.