The main goal of this study is to examine the current booth conditions in Taipei

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

The main goal of this study is to examine the current booth conditions in Taipei

in comparison with standards set in ISO 2603, ascertain the importance given to

various booth factors by interpreters, and determine whether interpreters’ needs with

regard to the booth environment are fulfilled. After conducting the POE methods of

field studies, questionnaire, and interviews, the results of this study have been

presented in the previous chapter. This chapter discusses some general trends and

implications which can be observed from the findings. Section 5.2 will present an

analysis of the findings, their implications, and recommendations as given by the

interpreters interviewed, and a compilation of recommendations for improvement of

existing booths is presented in Section 5.3.

5.2 Booth Factors

In Chapters 2 and 4, a number of factors were discussed, including booth size,

access, doors, visibility, windows, ventilation, lighting, seating, and working surface.

This section will discuss the analysis of results presented in the previous chapter, as

well as their implications and interpreters’ recommendations for improvement.

5.2.1 Booth Size

Interpreters responded in the survey questionnaire that booth size was

somewhere between important and very important, with a weighted average of 4.18.

The following figure presents how well interpreters feel various booths fulfill their

needs in terms of booth size, as well as whether or not the booths in question

conformed to the objective requirements of ISO 2603. Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

shows that the results for responses towards the booth size of various booths are

statistically different. As seen in Figure 5.1, the conformance or non-conformance has

some relation to how well interpreters’ needs are fulfilled. However, it is interesting to

note that while the booths of the TICC, with the exception of VIP Room booths, do

not conform to ISO 2603, they are more satisfactory than the two booths which do.

This may be explained by the fact that the TICC’s nonconformance in terms of booth

size is slight, being only approximately 20 centimeters short of ISO 2603’s

requirement for depth of booth, while the size of the other two conforming booths

may be deceptive. The NTUH International Convention Center’s booths are indeed

1

Please note that since the field studies include booths from the VIP Room, 401, and Plenary Hall in

TICC, whereas the questionnaire only differentiates between VIP Room booths and non-VIP Room

booths in TICC, the column “TICC (except for 4F VIP)” in the figures of this chapter shall refer to all

booths in the TICC, including both the Plenary Hall and 401 booths, with the exception of VIP Room

large; however, much of the space is not used by the interpreters, as one wall is

covered in shelving, the working surface does not stretch across the full width of the

booth, and interpreters may be forced to remain on one side of the room due to the

small window. The booths of Howard International House Taipei’s Convention Hall,

although large enough, are irregularly shaped, which may account for unused space

and the lower response in relation to the TICC.

does not conform to ISO 2603 conforms to ISO 2603

strongly disagree disagree

neutral agree strongly agree

TI C C (e xcep t f or 4F

V IP )

TI CC 4 F V

IP Ro om

NT U H IC C Gr an d H ote l

GI S C

on ve nt io n C en te r

Ho wa rd C on ve nt ion H al l H ow ar d Co

nf er en ce R oo m N at ion al C entr

al L ibr ar y

Figure 5.1. Questionnaire responses to “The size of the booth fulfills my needs” with differentiation between conformity and nonconformity with ISO 2603

ISO 2603 also stipulates that “for conference halls with up to six booths, one or

more should be 3.2 meters wide” and “for conference halls with more than six booths,

all booths shall be at least 3.2 meters wide”, in order to accommodate the continuous

presence of three interpreters. None of the booths surveyed, except for the NTUH

International Convention Center booth, are at least 3.2 meters wide. This study

speculates that this lack of adherence to ISO 2603 standards is due to Taiwanese

interpretation practices, in which very few conferences employ three interpreters to a

booth, as confirmed by Subjects F and G. Even fewer venues have more than six

booths, since seldom do conferences in Taiwan need over six language channels.

Implications:

As mentioned in Chapter 2, insufficient booth size can cause problems with

ventilation and a constant jostling of elbows, which can be a constant distraction to

interpreters who need to maintain a high level of concentration on conference

proceedings.

Insufficient booth size can be the result of designers’ lack of understanding for

interpreters’ needs. As mentioned in Chapter 4, Subjects C and D believe that overly

small booths may be due to designers’ misconception that conference interpreters

work alone in a booth, rather than in teams of two. However, this study cannot

confirm whether or not designers have misconceptions regarding interpretation

practices, since no interviews with architects were conducted. This lack of

understanding not only affects booth size, but other factors as well, as will be

described in later sections.

Interpreters themselves seem to be rather tolerant of small booths, as none of the

booths surveyed reached the ISO 2603 requirements, except in cases where the

nonconformance is severe, as can be seen in the booths of the TICC VIP Room,

Grand Hotel, GIS, and NCL. On the other hand, it is possible that the requirements of

ISO 2603 are too demanding, as interpreters seem quite satisfied with TICC booths

(except for 4F VIP), with its slight nonconformance. Another possibility is that

Taiwan interpreters are smaller in physique, hence the need for less space. However,

even if the latter is true, booth size should still be designed to provide adequate room

for interpreters with larger physiques.

The practice of conference interpretation in Taiwan also seems to support

nonconformance to ISO 2603 in terms of booth size. The lack of conferences

employing three interpreters to a booth and the predominance of conferences held

solely in Mandarin-English or Mandarin-Japanese languages result in few booths

large enough to support three interpreters. The Taiwan T&I Study (2004) shows that

over 60% of freelance interpreters believe that the interpretation market will remain

stable, and the need for various language combinations will remain the same.

However, just because there is no practice of working three in a booth at the current

time, doesn’t mean that this practice will not develop later. It may be prudent for some

of the larger and more popular venues to prepare for this need, especially since this

may attract large-scale conferences utilizing many languages.

Another possible cause of discrepancy between the standard ISO 2603 and

current conditions is the opposing points of view from conference hall operators and

interpreters. It is possible that conference hall operators and designers feel that small

booths are adequate, given that they are not constantly in use. However, rare use does

not excuse a lack of sufficient size. Restrooms for persons with disabilities, although

also not constantly in use, are required to be of a certain size. In both the cases of

interpreters’ booths and restrooms for the disabled, it is the function for which the

space is designed for and not the frequency of use which dictates its size. It is

therefore in the conference hall operators’ best interests to provide sufficient space for

interpreters to work without discomfort or distraction, in order to produce “optimal

quality” interpretation (Moser-Mercer, 1996).

Recommendations:

In the interview findings of Chapter 4, Subjects B and C recommend that booths

which are too small should be enlarged by taking down the partition wall and

combining two booths into one.

Since interpreters have very little contact with architects, they should make their

needs known to PCOs, conference organizers, and conference hall operators,

emphasizing the interpreters’ role in a conference’s communication process and the

need for sufficient booth size, rather than silently bearing with less than desirable

working conditions. With the findings of this study and other relevant research,

conference hall operators should reassess the working conditions provided for

conference interpreters. Whether renovating existing booths or designing new ones,

conference hall operators should convey the importance of interpreters’ booths to the

designers, who should then consult interpreters or ISO 2603 during the design process.

It is far less costly to conform to requirements from the outset, than to enlarge and

renovate the booths afterwards. Ergonomic requirements are consulted and adopted

for office and other workstations, and ISO 2603 should be adopted here.

5.2.2 Access

In the questionnaire, interpreters responded that easy access to the booth was

important with a weighted average of 4.00, and a separate entrance from the hall and

distance between interpretation booth and sound control booth were statistically less

so, with weighted averages of 3.39 and 3.68, respectively. Figure 5.2 presents

interpreters’ opinions as to the accessibility of various booths, which are statistically

different from one another. The figure also seems to show no direct relation between

the width of the access corridor and interpreters’ perception of easy access, as two of

the booths with narrow access corridors, GIS and Howard Conference Room, were

rated as relatively highly accessible in the questionnaire.

separate access, corridor less than 1.5 meters wide separate access, corridor at least 1.5 meters wide strongly agree

agree

neutral

disagree

strongly disagree

TIC C (ex

cep t f or 4F

VI P)

TI C C 4F V IP R

oo m NT U H I

CC Gr an d H ot el

G IS C on ve nt ion C ent er

H ow ar d C on ve nt ion H al l

H ow ar d C on fe ren ce Ro om N at io na l C en tral Li bra

ry

Figure 5.2. Questionnaire responses to “I can easily access the booth” with differentiation between widths of access corridor

However, other factors must be taken into account when discussing accessibility,

one of which is the location of the sound control booth and its distance to the

interpreters’ booth, which is shown in the Figure 5.3. The figure shows that booths

which are located close to the sound control booth tend to have narrow access

corridors. These booths share a corridor with the sound control booth, which is

generally not accessible by the public, meaning that designers may feel that less than

1.5 meters is sufficient width for a corridor. Whereas booths located further from the

sound control booth often open up to corridors accessible by the general public, which

are much wider.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree

separate access, corridor less than 1.5 meters wide separate access, corridor at least 1.5 meters wide strongly agree

TI C C (e xcep

t f or 4F V IP ) TI C C 4

F V IP R oo m

NT U H I CC

Gr an d H ot el

G IS C on ve nt ion C ent er H ow ar d C on ve nt ion H al l

H ow ar d C

on fer en ce R oo m Na tion

al C en tra l Li br ar y

Figure 5.3. Questionnaire responses to “The sound control booth is not located too far from the interpreters’ booth” with differentiation between widths of access corridor

Implications:

Generally speaking, interpretation booths should not be located too far from the

sound control booth, since interpreters and technicians need to communicate in the

case that problems arise. However, according an interview with Subject H,

interpreters are less than pleased to have to cross through the sound control booth to

reach the interpretation booth, probably because access is more difficult possibly due

to narrow corridors and the multitude of equipment and cables in the path.

Recommendations:

Since interpretation booths, sound control booths, restrooms, and other amenities

are usually fixed, architectural structures, there is no feasible way to improve access

other than a complete renovation, which is costly and not likely to be undertaken by

the conference hall operator. Therefore, it is imperative that designers be aware of the

issue of access during the design process by consulting interpreters or ISO 2603 in

order to avoid future repercussions.

5.2.3 Doors

Unsurprisingly, interpreters responded in this study’s survey questionnaire that it

was important for booth doors to operate silently, with a weighted average of 4.39,

which five of the nine booths surveyed complied with. They deemed it statistically

less important that doors have observation portholes, a light outside indicating an

active microphone, and indication of assigned languages and channels outside. The

breakdown of interpreters’ responses is shown in the Figure 5.4.

00 0 0 1

9

6 4

4

10

9 9 8

3 10 14

15

6

3 1

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28

Booth doors operate silently Booth doors have observation A light outside the booth door Indication of assigned languages

Number of Responses

Very important Important Average Unimportant Very unimportant

Figure 5.4. Distribution of questionnaire responses to the importance of door-related

factors

It is interesting to note that while the importance of silently operating doors is

clearly of importance to interpreters, the importance given to the other three factors is

much less so. The existence of observation portholes may indeed allow outside

individuals to enter the booth with more care, or indeed dissuade them from

disturbing the interpreters at work, but the difference of opinion may also depend on

the interpreters’ differing regards for privacy. The responses towards indication of

assigned languages and channels are also somewhat mixed; however, this study

speculates that because many of the conference use only English/Mandarin channels

(over 80% of the conferences, by one PCO’s estimate), perhaps English/Mandarin

interpreters are unaware of this need, whereas interpreters of other languages, such as

Subject F, feel strongly about the need for indication.

Implications:

Interpreters need a working environment which is free from distraction, since

interpretation requires intense concentration. Doors which produce sound can be one

such distraction. During the course of a conference, materials may be passed into the

booth for the interpreters’ reference, and while one interpreter is working, the other

may need to step out for a drink of water or to use the restroom. Hence, it is important

that doors operate silently as not to disturb the interpreters working.

The need for a porthole in the door or light indicating an active microphone is

less clear in this study. Therefore, further studies may be needed to understand the

interpreters’ preference in this matter.

A lack of signage can be overlooked when only one booth is in use. However, in

the case that more than one booth is in use, it is preferable to have indication of

languages and channels outside booth doors to avoid confusion among interpreters,

technicians, and conference operators, who may need to pass along information or

materials to the interpreters.

Recommendations:

Doors should operate silently so as not to cause a disturbance to the working

interpreters.

Signage or indication of languages and channels should be posted outside the

booth door in the case that more than one booth is in use during a conference in order

to avoid confusion. In addition, one interpreter added that signs should be posted

outside booth doors to remind passer-bys to be quiet, as doors are often the weak

point in the soundproofed environment of the booth.

5.2.4 Visibility

The importance of visibility has already been emphasized and reported in the

previous chapters. To summarize the questionnaire results of Chapter 4, interpreters

found the visibility of the speaker’s facial expressions, the podium/rostrum, provision

of visual support, view of the entire conference room, and visibility of interaction

among conference participants to be quite important, with the weighted averages of

4.57, 4.86, 4.75, 4.36, and 4.25, respectively.

However, as important as this factor is, it is apparent that interpreters generally

feel that booths surveyed offer poor visibility. In the field studies, visibility received

an overall compliance rate of 45%. Figures 5.5 and 5.6 presents the responses of

interpreters, where they, for the most part, disagree or strongly disagree with the

visibility of the speaker’s facial expressions and the entire conference hall.

Interpreters’ responses with regard to the visibility of the speaker’s facial expressions

have been compiled along with the booths’ provision of visual support, due to this

study’s initial speculation that the latter may have some influence on the former, into

Figure 5.5, as seen below. However, as the figure shows, there is no apparent relation

between the provision of visual support and the visibility of the speaker’s facial

expressions. The relatively higher rating of TICC booths (excepting VIP Room booths)

is due to the fact that this study failed to take into account the different locations of

the numerous booths in relation to various conference halls at this venue.

strongly disagree

visual support is provided (note:

TICC Plenary Hall provides visual support, TICC 401 does not)

visual support is not provided

strongly agree agree neutral disagree

TI CC

(e xc ept fo r 4F V IP )

TI C C 4F V IP R

oo m NT

U H IC C G ran d H

ot el

GI S Co nv en tion

C en ter

Ho w ar d C

on ve nt io n H al l

H ow ar d C

on fer en ce Ro om Na tio na l C ent ra l L ibr ar y

Figure 5.5. Questionnaire responses to “I can see the speaker’s facial expressions”

with differentiation between provision of visual support.

Figure 5.6 presents the responses of interpreters towards the visibility of

conference halls from various booths. The differentiation of solid and striped bars

represents the findings of the field studies; however, many of them are rather

subjective since, as mentioned in Chapter 4, the issue of having a direct view may be

open to interpretation and personal opinion. Again, the responses for TICC booths

(excepting VIP Room booths) may be inaccurate, due to this study’s lack of

consideration for the different sitings for various booths in this venue. Other factors

that must be taken into account include the size of the hall and the angle at which the

booth is positioned.

strongly disagree disagree

neutral agree strongly agree

No direct view of the entire conference room

There is a direct view of the entire conference room (debatable for TICC Plenary Hall, Grand Hotel, Howard

TI C C (e xc ept for 4F V IP )

TI CC 4F

V IP Room NT

U H ICC Gr and

H ote l

G IS Conve nt ion C

en ter

H ow ard Conve nt ion H

al l

Ho w ar d Conf

ere nc e Room

N at iona l Ce

nt ra l L ibra ry

Figure 5.6. Questionnaire responses to “I have a good view of the conference hall from the booth” with differentiation of findings from the field studies

Despite the high importance given to most aspects of booth visibility by

interpreters, the interaction between interpreters and delegates as well as the visibility

between booths through side windows is statistically less important, with a weighted

average of 3.00 and 3.29 respectively. A breakdown of questionnaire responses is

presented in the following figure, Figure 5.7.

2

8 9

6

3

1 2

15

8

2 0

5 10 15 20

V ery

u ni m po rta nt

U ni m po rtan t

A ver ag e

Im por tan t

V er y im po rtan t

Interaction between

interpreters in the booth and conference delegates Visibility between booths (through side windows)

Figure 5.7. Distribution of questionnaire responses to the importance of interaction between interpreters and delegates and visibility between booths

The interviews with interpreters provided some insight as to this difference of

opinion. Some felt that visibility of interpreters in other booths was not necessary,

mainly because, as mentioned before, a majority of the conferences held in Taipei use

only Mandarin and English, hence no other booths are in use. However, some felt that

this factor was important, especially when other booths were in use and when

interpreters were doing relay interpretation. The importance of interaction between

interpreters in the booth and conference delegates was equally divided. Interpreters

responded in the interviews that this was a nice thing to have, but for the most part,

interaction between interpreters and delegates was nonexistent, which may explain the

distribution of responses.

Implications:

As mentioned in Chapter 2, if interpreters cannot see, they cannot interpret.

Perhaps the common misconception among non-interpreters is that interpreters need

only to hear the message to interpret. This does not take into account the nonverbal

messages that may be conveyed during a conference. The potential effects of poor

visibility from the simultaneous interpretation booths may be the interpreter’s

discomfort, distress, or poor-quality or inaccurate interpretation, which may then

affect the audience’s understanding and the speaker’s ability to communicate with the

audience.

Since most aspects of visibility were rated as quite important in the questionnaire,

and interpreters also responded that they generally could not see the speaker’s facial

expressions nor did they have a good view of the conference hall, it is quite clear that

this is one of the factors which interpreters feel strongly about and are less than

satisfied with.

Recommendations:

As reported in the interview findings of Chapter 4, interpreters felt it was

necessary to bring in visual support in the form of monitors to facilitate the

interpretation process in booths with poor visibility. One interpreter even suggested

that all booths should be fitted with monitors, since interpreters needed to read the

fine print on slides that are often located too far to discern. Although PCOs and

interpreters themselves are very much aware of the importance of visibility to the

interpretation process, other related parties, such as conference hall operators,

conference hall designers, conference organizers, and possibly even the speakers and

audience members, should be made aware of this need, so as to ensure the quality of

interpretation and pleasant conference proceedings. Even though the installation of

monitors will present an additional cost for conference hall operators, the findings of

the questionnaire and interviews have sufficiently expressed the necessity of seeing

the speaker’s facial expressions and slides for quality interpretation.

Regardless of whether the interpreters wish to see the speaker’s facial

expressions, the podium, or the audience, an interpreter’s ability to see outside the

booth is largely related to the design of booth windows, which will be discussed in the

following section.

5.2.5 Windows

As with visibility, interpreters found booth windows to be highly important

factors, with a weighted average of 4.50 for the size of front windows. Overall, the

compliance rate for windows is 23%, as found in the field studies. Figure 5.8 presents

whether the front windows of various booths fit interpreters’ needs, as well as the

distinction between booths whose windows do and do not conform to ISO 2603.

strongly disagree agree strongly agree

does not conform with any ISO 2603 standards for front windows

disagree neutral

front windows stretch across full width of booth

TI C C (e xcep t fo

r 4 F V IP )

TI C C 4 F V IP R oo m

NT U H ICC

Gr an d H ote l

G IS C on ve nti on C en ter H ow ar d C on ve nt io n H al l

H ow ar d C on fer en ce Ro om

N at io na l C en tra l L ib rar y

Figure 5.8. Questionnaire responses to “The size of the front windows fulfills my needs” with differentiation of findings from the field studies

Unsurprisingly, front windows of booths which conform, albeit somewhat, to

ISO 2603 are among those which interpreters feel fulfill their needs in terms of

window size. The front window of the Grand Hotel booths was considered the most

satisfactory among the nonconforming booths, since they nearly stretch across the full

width of the booth. In addition, the booths of the Grand Hotel are located on the

mezzanine level, where the height of the window is not quite such a big issue for

interpreters’ line of sight. The front windows of GIS and Howard Conference room

measure 80cm by 110cm and 114cm by 150cm, respectively, and are placed quite

high above the working surface, forcing interpreters to stand to see out of them. The

front window of the NTUH International Convention Center is quite similar,

measuring 93cm wide by 90cm high, placed 30cm above the working surface. Its size

seems even smaller in comparison with the wide expanse of the front wall, which is

4.07 meters across. From the findings of the field studies and questionnaire, it is

apparent that the TICC VIP Room booth window is the worst.

As mentioned in Chapter 4, only TICC booths (with the exception of VIP Room

booths) are fitted with side windows. One PCO mentioned that an overwhelming

majority of conferences which use simultaneous interpretation only uses one booth,

mostly for Mandarin/English channels. She estimates that fewer than 10% of

international conferences use three or more booths, and speculates that the number

may be even smaller than that. Thus, with the frequency of more than three booths of

a hall in use at the same time being so small, it is not surprising that side windows are

overlooked and not incorporated into many of the conference venues. Another

possible explanation is that designers simply were unaware of the need for side

windows.

Interpreters also considered it quite important that windows do not cast off glare,

giving it a weighted average of 4.46, and it was found in field studies that most of the

booth windows cast some level of glare, the exceptions perhaps being the TICC VIP

Room and Grand Hotel booths, due to overly small windows and insufficient lighting,

respectively. However, as Figure 5.9 shows, interpreters feel that the windows of

TICC VIP Room and NCL booths cause more glare, statistically speaking.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree

TI C C (ex cep

t f or 4F V IP )

TI CC 4 F V

IP Ro om

N TU H IC C

Gr an d H ote l

GI S C

on ve nt io n C en te r

H ow ar d C on ve nt ion H al l

H ow ar d Co

nf er en ce R oo m N at ion al C en tra l Li

br ar y

Figure 5.9. Questionnaire responses to “The front windows do not cause glare”

Implications:

Obviously, window size is important; not only for itself, but for how well

interpreters can see out of it. In Chapter 4, some interpreters responded that it was not

so much the width of the window which was important, but rather the height at which

the window is placed, because it dictates whether or not interpreters will be able to see

while seated. The fact that so many booth windows are placed so high above the

working surface implies either a lack of consideration towards booth design or the

misunderstanding that interpreters work standing up.

Recommendations:

First, the front windows of interpretation booths should be enlarged, according to

interpreters interviewed, and placed at a height suitable for seated interpreters to see

out of. Ideally, the lower edge of the front window should be level with the working

surface, per the requirements of ISO 2603, to ensure that the interpreters’ line of sight

not be obstructed. In addition, windows should use untinted glass so that interpreters

will not be hampered by glare and be able to clearly see the conference proceedings.

Another suggestion would be to raise the floor level of the booth, thereby concealing

cables and wires beneath the flooring and bringing the interpreters up to a height

where they may more comfortably see out the window.

Second, although the importance of side windows is often overlooked, and

thought of as important only in situations requiring relay interpretation, considering

that Taiwan is moving towards globalization and closer cooperation with international

partners, the number of conferences using multiple languages and relay interpretation

can only increase, possibly resulting in a future need for more and more booths

equipped with side windows. In light of this, it is recommended that conference halls

which frequently use multiple languages and channels ensure that side windows are

placed to allow visual communication between booths.

5.2.6 Ventilation

In the previous chapter, interpreters stressed the importance of ventilation,

revealing through interviews that poor ventilation can cause distraction, discomfort,

and even adversely affect an interpreter’s performance. From the questionnaire,

interpreters expressed that all ventilation factors surveyed are important to very

important. Figure 5.10 presents questionnaire results, showing that interpreters are not,

on the whole, satisfied with the temperature and air quality in various booths. More

than one interpreter remarked that the booths at Grand Hotel are exceptionally cold,

which is also somewhat noticeable from Figure 5.10.

strongly agree

neutral

strongly disagree agree

disagree

TICC (excep

t fo r 4F VIP

)

TICC 4F VIP

Room NT

UH ICC

Gra nd Ho

tel

GIS Co

nvention Ce

nter

Howard Co

nvention Hall

Howard C onf

erence Ro om

National Cent ral Library

Booth

temperature is moderate.

Good air quality within the booth.

Figure 5.10. Questionnaire responses to “Booth temperature is moderate” and “Good

air quality within the booth”

Interpreters interviewed for this study also mentioned that booths were often too

stuffy, not due to the temperature itself, but to lack of air flow within the booth.

Recommendations:

The interpreters interviewed have suggested that improvements be made with

regard to ventilation and booth temperature, recommending the use of air purifiers or

fans as temporary solutions. However, these temporary solutions are not without

setbacks; air purifiers tend to give off heat and both air purifiers and fans create

background noise, which may pose as additional sources of distraction for

interpreters.

Each booth should have its own independent temperature regulator, to ensure

that interpreters can adjust the temperature according to their needs and work in a

comfortable environment.

This study was not able to conduct an in-depth look into current ventilation

conditions due to limitations in the scope of study. Further research is needed to

understand the root of interpreters’ complaints and how best to improve booth

ventilation.

5.2.7 Acoustics

It is no surprise that respondents to the questionnaire considered acoustics to be

the most important category of factors with regard to booths for simultaneous

interpretation, with “acoustic separation between booth and conference hall” receiving

an average of 4.75, 4.64 for “acoustic separation between booths”, and 4.96 for

“quality of sound transmission”, which is significantly higher than the first two,

statistically speaking. Figure 5.11 shows the results of how well booths fulfill

interpreters’ acoustic needs in various booths. Interpreters generally agree that TICC

booths (except for VIP Room booths) provide good acoustic separation between

booths and the conference hall, as well as between booths. The TICC VIP Room

booths were a later addition to the convention center, and thus perhaps were not as

well equipped in terms of sound insulation compared to the other booths of TICC. As

mentioned in Chapter 4, the NTUH International Convention Center has only one

booth per hall, thus the matter of acoustic separation between booths is moot, as well

as for Howard Convention Hall booths, which are located on opposite sides of the hall.

The unique conditions of the Grand Hotel booths were also discussed in the section on

windows in the field study results of Chapter 4, explaining that the reason for the

booths’ terrible acoustic separation between booths resulted from the partitioning wall

not extending all the way to the front windows, leaving a gap in which sound travels

from one booth to the other. Generally speaking, interpreters are moderately satisfied

with the quality of sound transmission, with the exception of the National Central

Library, which this study speculates may be the result of the aged building structure

and sound system.

Good acoustic separation between the booth and the conference hall

strongly disagree disagree

neutral agree strongly agree

Good acoustic separation between booths

Good sound transmission quality TI C C (e xcep

t f or 4F V IP )

TI C C 4F V IP R oo m N TUH

IC C Gr an d H ot el

G IS Co nve

nt ion C en ter

H owa

rd C on ve nt ion Ha

ll

H ow ar d C on fer en ce R oo m Na tio na l C ent ra l L ibr ar y

Figure 5.11. Questionnaire responses to “Good acoustic separation between the booth and the conference hall”, “Good acoustic separation between booths” and “Good sound transmission quality”

During the interviews, interpreters often overlooked this factor, which one

subject explained may be due to the fact that interpreters generally feel that this is so

basic a requirement that they take for granted that all booths should allow interpreters

hear clearly without distraction.

Implications:

As one interpreter simply states, “If I can’t hear, I can’t interpret.” The quality of

sound transmission is dependent on a number of things, such as the sound system, the

skills of the technician, and the console and headsets. This factor is so important that

it is the primary concern for conference organizers, as reported by the PCOs

interviewed.

Acoustic separation is also deemed important by interpreters. Although this

should be an obvious factor, considering that interpreters require intense concentration

in their work and other noises can only serve as a distraction, non-interpreters can

sometimes forget this fact. As more than one interpreter mentioned, one such

conference hall uses curtains to separate booths, believing it to be sufficient in terms

of actual and acoustic separation. As mentioned in previous sections, many of the

shortcomings in booth design, such as a lack of acoustic separation, may be due to a

lack of understanding in the work requirements of an interpreter. The alternative is

that interpreters’ needs were never considered in the first place. Either way, it is

imperative that interpreters be recognized as playing a crucial role in the process of

communication and conferences and that booths be designed and equipped to meet

their needs.

Recommendations:

Interpreters suggested that poor or malfunctioning sound systems be improved or

replaced. Booths with poor acoustic separation should be renovated and

soundproofing materials be added to ensure that interpreters can work without undue

distraction.

5.2.8 Lighting

As mentioned in previous chapters, lighting is an important booth factor, and

interpreters generally feel the same, giving “booth lighting is controllable by

interpreters” a weighted average of 4.32, 4.14 for “light switches are easily accessible

to interpreters”, and 4.36 for “work lights are provided in addition to general lights” in

terms of importance. Figure 5.12 presents how interpreters feel towards whether there

is sufficient lighting and work lights in the booth. Unsurprisingly, the two venues that

do not provide work lights, the Grand Hotel and NCL, received relatively lower

ratings.

strongly disagree disagree neutral agree strongly agree

TI C C (e xcep t fo

r 4 F V IP )

TI C C 4 F V IP R oo m N TU

H IC C G ra nd H ot el

G IS C on ve nt ion C en te r

H ow ar d Co nve nt ion

Ha ll

H ow ar d Co nf er en ce R oo m N at io na l C en tra l Li

bra ry

Sufficient lighting within the booth.

Work lights are sufficient.

Figure 5.12. Questionnaire responses to “Sufficient lighting within the booth” and

“Work lights are sufficient”

Equally unsurprising is the correlation between easy access of light switches and

their location by the door, as shown in Figure 5.13, where the TICC VIP Room,

NTUH, and Grand Hotel, whose light switches are located outside the door, across the

sound control booth, and controlled by sound booth technicians, respectively, receive

relatively lower ratings than other booths.

strongly disagree disagree

neutral agree strongly agree

general light switch not located by the door

general light switch located by the door

TI C C (e xcep

t f or 4F V IP ) TI C C 4 F V

IP Ro om

N TUH IC C

Gr an d Ho tel

G IS C on ve nt io n C en ter H ow ar d C on ve nt ion

H al l

H ow ar d Co nf er en ce Ro

om

N at io na l C en tra l L ib rar y

Figure 5.13 Questionnaire responses to “Light switches are easily accessible to interpreters” with differentiation of findings from the field studies

Implications:

As Chapter 2 mentions, lights often have to be dimmed in the conference hall for

slides or presentation, and it is important for booths to have independent lighting and

work lights so as to be able to see the speaker, delegates, and conference hall in

general, as well as refer to the documents and other material before them.

Visual discomfort can arise without proper lighting, or with poor or inadequate

lighting, as was also mentioned in Chapter 2. Symptoms of visual discomfort, such as

red, sore, itchy, and watering eyes, headaches and migraine attacks, gastrointestinal

problems, and aches and pains associated with poor posture, can appear, and may

result in a decrease in the quality of interpretation.

Recommendations:

All booths should have independent lighting from the hall, and the general light

switch should be easily accessible to interpreters. Work lights are a must, and should

be adjustable as to avoid glare on the windows. In addition, dimmer switches should

be added, so as to allow the interpreters themselves to control the amount of light they

receive.

5.2.9 Seating, Working Surface, and Shelving

According to interpreters, the comfort of booth seats and having sufficient

working surface in the booth rates somewhere between important and very important,

with a weighted average of 4.46 and 4.57 respectively.

Figure 5.14 shows the interpreters’ perception of comfort of booth seats in

various booths. As mentioned in Chapter 4, none of the booths seats fully comply with

ISO 2603; however, there is also no great difference in interpreters’ perceptions.

strongly agree

agree

neutral

disagree

strongly disagree

TIC C (ex

cep t f or 4F VI

P)

TI CC 4 F V

IP Ro om

NT U H I CC

Gr an d Ho te l

G IS C on ve nt ion C ent er H ow ar d C

onv en tio n H

al l

H ow ar d C

on fer en ce Ro om

N ati on al C ent ra l L ibr ar y

Figure 5.14. Questionnaire responses to “Booth seats are comfortable”

The degree to which interpreters feel working surfaces in various booths fulfill

their need to read documents seems to not be affected by whether or not said working

surface conforms to ISO 2603 standards. Figure 5.15 shows very little relation

between interpreters’ satisfaction with sufficient working space compared to whether

or not the working surface stretches across the full width of the booth. What the figure

does not show, is the relationship between size of the working surface and size of the

booth. For example, although the working surface of the Grand Hotel booths does

indeed stretch across the whole width of the booth, the booth is by no means wide

enough and hence the amount of working surface is deemed less sufficient than those

in other booths, such as the NTUH booth’s working surface.

strongly disagree disagree

neutral agree strongly agree

working surface does not stretch across full width of booth working surface stretches across full width of booth

T ICC (

ex ce pt fo r 4 F V IP )

T IC C 4F VI P R

oo m N T UH

I C C Gr an d H

ote l

GI S Co nv en tio n Ce nte r Ho wa rd C on ve nti on H al l

Ho wa rd C on fe re nc e Ro om N ati on al C entr

al L ib ra ry

Figure 5.15. Questionnaire responses to “I have sufficient working surface in the booth to read documents” with differentiation of findings from the field studies

Out of the eight booths asked in the questionnaire, only the NTUH and Howard

Convention Hall contained shelving. Interpreters felt that sufficient shelves or trays

were only of average importance, giving it a weighted average of 3.14. As Figure 5.16

shows, interpreters seem to show no strong opinion for whether or not a booth

provides shelves or trays.

Booths without shelving Booths with shelving

TI C C (e xc ep t fo r 4 F V IP)

TI C C 4F V IP R oo m

NT U H ICC Gr an d H

ote l

G IS Co nv en tion

C en te r

H ow ar d C on ve nt io n Ha ll Ho w ar d C

on fe ren ce R oo m Na tio na l C ent ral L ibr ar y strongly agree

agree

neutral

disagree strongly disagree

Figure 5.16. Questionnaire responses to “The booth provides sufficient shelves or trays for document storage” with differentiation of findings from the field studies

Implications:

Uncomfortable seating can cause neck and back pains, which may lead to a

decrease in interpretation quality. Insufficient working surface may cause distraction;

the clutter of materials in the booth without adequate space to place them may cause

interpreters to break their intense concentration. Although these may seem like minor

details, it is all the more important to pay notice to these factors since they are so

easily resolved.

Recommendations:

Chairs and working surfaces are easily replaced, so the persons responsible

should ensure that chairs comply with ISO 2603 standards; most notably, the height

and back rest should be adjustable to allow each and every interpreter to sit

comfortably. Enough working surface are should be provided so that interpreters will

have space to lay out their documents, materials, and laptop computers.

5.2.10 Additional Booth Factors

In the interview findings in Chapter 4, interpreters made special mention of three

additional booth factors that affected their comfort or work – cleanliness, internet

access, and water source.

It should go without saying that booths should be kept clean. No one enjoys

working in a slovenly environment, covered with dust or with drawers full of leftover

food or beverage containers. Likewise, booths should not be used as a storage room,

as it creates unnecessary clutter in an already small space. This lack of regard towards

the interpreter’s working environment may create discomfort.

The latest version of ISO 2603 was published in 1998, and recent times have

seen the increased use of laptop computers and internet access that was perhaps not

considered during the drafting of the standard. Three of the six interpreters

interviewed mentioned that a power source and internet access was essential for their

work, as interpreters often need to research materials during the course of the

conference.

During simultaneous interpretation, the interpreter must continually interpret the

speaker’s message into the target language, which requires speaking into the

microphone. For this reason, large amounts of water are consumed by the interpreters

during the course of a conference. It has been suggested that as an alternative to

providing many bottles of bottled water, which can accumulate and clutter the

working surface, drinking fountains should instead be installed in the hallway outside

the interpreters’ booths.

5.3 Implementation Checklist for Existing Booths in Taipei

Although there are many conference halls in Taipei, few if any of the booths

conform to the requirements set out in ISO 2603. The three main causes of

discrepancy between ISO 2603, current conditions, and interpreters’ needs are as

follows:

1. The designers’ lack of understanding for interpreters’ needs. Examples of

this include insufficient booth size, poor visibility, overly small or

misplaced windows, and poor acoustic separation.

2. Different practices in Taiwan’s conference interpretation industry.

Examples include lack of booths big enough to seat three interpreters and

absence of signage indicating assigned languages and channels due to the

predominance of conferences using only one booth, mostly in

Mandarin-English or Mandarin-Japanese.

3. Opposing points of view between conference hall operators and

interpreters. Examples include insufficient booth size and booths

doubling as storage space based on operators’ claim of rare usage.

The main idea behind post occupancy evaluation is that the design of spaces can

be improved by asking users about their needs. Thus, conference halls can improve

the current conditions of booths by referring to ISO 2603 or consulting with

interpreters. While complete renovation of booths may be unfeasible for conference

halls booked many months in advance, some modifications can be made to better the

working conditions of interpreters, and in so, ensuring the quality of interpretation.

Conference hall operators and designers should acquaint themselves with the needs of

interpreters prior to undertaking the renovation of booths for simultaneous

interpretation. Based on the findings of this study and current booth conditions in

Taipei, below is an implementation checklist for conference hall operators to refer to.

1. Booths should be large enough to comfortably seat two interpreters. If

booths were originally built to seat one interpreter, combine two

adjoining booths into one by taking down the partition wall.

2. Visual support in the form of monitors should be installed in booths with

poor visibility.

3. Windows should be enlarged and fitted with untinted glass. The lower

edge of the window should be level with the height of the working

surface. In the case that conference hall operators find it impossible to

retrofit windows, monitors should be installed as a temporary means for

interpreters to view conference proceedings.

4. Air purifiers and/or fans should be brought in to temporarily compensate

for poor ventilation conditions until such time that the ventilation system

itself can be improved. Each booth should be able to control the

temperature independently.

5. Poor or malfunctioning sound systems should be improved or updated.

Booths with poor acoustic separation should be fitted with soundproofing

material as needed.

6. Work lights should be added in all booths, one to each interpreter.

General lights for booths should be independently controllable by the

interpreter, and the general light switch should be located close to the

door. Dimmer switches, for both general and work lights, should be

added.

7. The working surface should extend across the full width of the booth, and

provide enough space for documents and interpreters’ laptop computers.

The chairs should be comfortable, and have adjustable height and back

rests.

8. Booths should be regularly cleaned and aired. Booths should not be used

as storage rooms, and should be kept free of unnecessary clutter.

9. Booths should provide power outlets for the interpreters’ laptop

computers, and have internet access for interpreters to research materials.

10. A source of water, such as a drinking fountain, should be located near

interpreters’ booths.