翻譯
探究口譯員的同理心同步口譯時,情緒是否也同步? [Investigating interpreters’ empathy: Are emotions in simultaneous interpreting contagious?]

帕瓦.科帕安列珊卓拉.加西耶斯卡
亞當米奇衛茲大學波茲蘭校區 | 國立臺灣大學

翻譯 莊英里 楊睿珊 蔡佩妤蔡毓芬2
1亞當米奇衛茲大學波茲蘭校區 | 2國立臺灣大學

摘要

本研究採用實驗方法來測驗講者的情緒對同步口譯員是否有影響。研究員使用兩種情緒測量方式:以皮膚電流反應 (galvanic skin response, GSR) 作為情緒激發的標記,以及SUPIN,也就是波蘭版的正負影響量表 (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, PANAS)。本研究的研究對象為20位以波蘭文作為A語言及英文作為B語言的口譯員。受試者必須將兩篇演講(附影像的音檔)由波蘭文同步口譯為英文: 一篇為中性語音,另一篇為情緒性語音。研究結果顯示,講者的情緒確實會影響口譯員。而相較於中性語音及基準值,口譯員在翻譯情緒性語音時,皮膚電流反應較大,SUPIN分數也較高。本研究有助於進一步了解同步口譯過程中情緒處理的重要性。

關鍵字
目錄

1.前言

近幾十年來,心理相關研究在口譯學中越來越受到重視。根據以話語分析為基礎的互動性理論模式(Wadensjö 1998Wadensjö, Cecilia 1998Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar),口譯可視為一種溝通的活動。其中,口譯員是中介者,在兩方之間傳達字句的意義,同時傳達講者的意圖及情緒。部分口譯學者強調心理情感因素在口譯專業中的重要性 (Brisau, Godijns and Meuleman 1994Brisau, André, Rita Godijns, and Chris Meuleman 1994 “Towards a Psycholinguistic Profile of the Interpreter.” Meta 39 (1): 87–94. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Timarová and Ungoed-Thomas 2008Timarová, Šarka, and Harry Ungoed-Thomas 2008 “Admission Testing for Interpreting Courses.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (1): 29–46. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Bontempo and Napier 2011Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier 2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 85–105. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Pöchhacker 2011Pöchhacker, Franz 2011 “Assessing Aptitude for Interpreting: The SynCloze Test.” Interpreting 13 (1): 106–120. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Rosiers, Eyckmans and Bauwens 2011Rosiers, Alexandra, June Eyckmans, and Daniel Bauwens 2011 “A Story of Attitudes and Aptitudes? Investigating Individual Difference Variables within the Context of Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 53–69. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。例如,Brisau、Godijns與Meuleman (1994Brisau, André, Rita Godijns, and Chris Meuleman 1994 “Towards a Psycholinguistic Profile of the Interpreter.” Meta 39 (1): 87–94. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 87)認為,「多數的語言學習,特別是口譯員的訓練,似乎都忽略了學習者的人為特性,也忽視了學習者在學習語言時,所帶入心理情感的框架。」

自1960年代口譯員開始參與控制實驗起 (Kade 1968 1968Zufall und Gesetzmäßigkeit in der Übersetzung. Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar; Gerver 1969Gerver, David 1969 “The Effects of Source Language Presentation Rate on the Performance of Simultaneous Conference Interpreters.” In Proceedings of the 2nd Louisville Conference on Rate and/or Frequency Controlled Speech, edited by Emerson Foulke, 162–184. Louisville, KY: University of Louisville.Google Scholar),以認知方式研究同步口譯就一直是主流。許多研究探討了如口譯員的工作記憶、同步聆聽及產出、同時處理多項子任務等主題(Oléron and Nanpon 1965Oléron, Pierre, and Hubert Nanpon 1965 “Recherches sur la traduction simultanée.” Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 62 (2): 73–94.Google Scholar; Kade 1968 1968Zufall und Gesetzmäßigkeit in der Übersetzung. Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar; Gile 1995Gile, Daniel 1995Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Christoffels and de Groot 2005Christoffels, Ingrid, and Annette de Groot 2005 “Simultaneous Interpreting: A Cognitive Perspective.” In Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, edited by Judith F. Kroll and Annette de Groot, 454–479. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar) ,並且已有廣泛研究。最近,溝通的多模態(multimodality paradigm)在口譯研究中也取得了一些進展。這是因為口譯的過程中涉及多種表達模式及生物機制 (Vranjes et al. 2015Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke Bot, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône 2015 “Multimodal Feedback Mechanisms in Interpreter-Mediated Interaction.” Paper presented at the 14th International Pragmatics Conference (Antwerp).; Davitti et al. 2016Davitti, Elena, Eloisa Monteoliva, Demi Krystallidou, and Sabine Braun 2016 “Multimodal Analysis of a Multimodal Activity: Methodological Explorations of Interpreter-Mediated Interaction.” Paper presented at the Critical Link 8 Conference, Edinburgh, UK.; Seeber 2017 2017 “Multimodal Processing in Simultaneous Interpreting.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 461–475. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),例如手勢 (Zagar Galvão 2009Zagar Galvão, Elena 2009 “Speech and Gesture in the Booth – a Descriptive Approach to Multimodality in Simultaneous Interpreting.” In Translation and the (Trans)formation of Identities. Selected Papers of the CETRA Research Seminar in Translation Studies 2008, edited by Dries De Crom, 1–26. Leuven: CETRA.Google Scholar)、眼神 (Vranjes et al. 2016Vranjes, Jelena, Annelies Jehoul, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône 2016 “Dual Feedback in Triadic Interactions: On the Interplay between Gesture and Gaze.” Paper presented at the ISGS Conference 2016: Gesture, Creativity, Multimodality (Paris).) 、視覺材料的取得和與講者的接觸 (Seeber 2012Seeber, Kilian 2012 “Multimodal Input in Simultaneous Interpreting: An Eye-Tracking Experiment.” In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference TRANSLATA, Translation and Interpreting Research: Yesterday – Today – Tomorrow, edited by Lew Zybatov, Alena Petrova and Michael Ustaszewski, 341–347. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar)等。溝通多模態的研究指出在口譯的過程中,字句的意思及情緒都會藉由語言及非語言的溝通方式表達出來。

Bontempo and Napier (2011Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier 2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 85–105. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 87) 指出,心理及情感因素都可能會對口譯有所影響。因此,近年來不僅有筆譯過程的情感因素研究 (Rojo, Ramos Caro and Valenzuela 2014Rojo, Ana, Marina Ramos Caro, and Javier Valenzuela 2014 “The Emotional Impact of Translation: A Heart Rate Study.” Journal of Pragmatics 71: 31–44. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)、口述影像的情感因素研究 (Ramos Caro and Rojo 2014Ramos Caro, Marina, and Ana Rojo 2014 “ ‘Feeling’ Audio Description: Exploring the Impact of AD on Emotional Response.” Translation Spaces 3: 133–150. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),也有對口譯員的實證研究。例如,口譯學者對專業口譯員與口譯新手的人格特質一直很感興趣。Schweda Nicholson (2005)Schweda Nicholson, Nancy 2005 “Personality Characteristics of Interpreter Trainees: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13: 109–142.Google Scholar使用麥布二氏人格類型指標 (Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, MBTI) (Myers-Briggs 1962Myers-Briggs, Isabel 1962Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar) 進行研究。研究結果發現,在口譯新手中,理智型的人比感性型的多。這是因為在口譯專業中,分析思考的特質極為重要 (Schweda Nicholson 2005Schweda Nicholson, Nancy 2005 “Personality Characteristics of Interpreter Trainees: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13: 109–142.Google Scholar, 137)。除此之外, Moser-Mercer (2005)Moser-Mercer, Barbara 2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar用艾森克性格問卷 (Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, EPQ, Eysenck and Eysenck 1975Eysenck, Hans J., and Sybil B. G. Eysenck 1975Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R Adult). San Diego, CA: EdITS.Google Scholar) 測量口譯員的人格特質。Moser-Mercer (2005)Moser-Mercer, Barbara 2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar發現口譯員有高度精神病質及低度神經質的特質。口譯員之所以有高度精神病質,是因為口譯員常常是自由業者,需要面對各式各樣的案子。Moser-Mercer (2005Moser-Mercer, Barbara 2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar, 86)推估,口譯員跟不同的團隊的合作大多為短期,導致口譯員性格較為孤僻。較低的神經質指數,則表示口譯員較不容易感到緊張、情緒多變、或是沮喪(Moser-Mercer 2005Moser-Mercer, Barbara 2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar, 87)。

Bontempo and Napier (2011)Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier 2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 85–105. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar的實證研究證實,情緒穩定度是口譯員能力及適任與否的指標。這項以負面影響量表測量的研究結果顯示,情緒穩定度對口譯員的能力有很大的影響 (Bontempo and Napier 2011Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier 2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 85–105. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 98)。Bontempo and Napier 2011Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier 2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 85–105. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar認為,這樣的研究結果顯示情緒穩定度讓口譯員得以舒緩口譯員工作環境中常見的工作壓力、挑戰及職業壓力 (Bontempo and Napier 2011Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier 2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 85–105. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 99)。另一項研究則採用多項心理測量工具,包括:學習方式問卷 (Inventory of Learning Styles) (Vermunt and Rijswijk 1987Vermunt, Jan, and Frank van Rijswijk 1987Inventaris Leerstijlen [Inventory of learning styles]. Tilburg: K.U. Brabant/Open Universiteit.Google Scholar)、成就動機測驗 (Hermans 2004Hermans, Hubert 2004Prestatie Motivatie Test [Achievement motivation test]. Lisse: Harcourt Test Publishers.Google Scholar),以及威斯康辛卡片分類測驗 (Grant and Berg 1948Grant, David A., and Esta A. Berg 1948 “A Behavioural Analysis of Degree of Reinforcement and Ease of Shifting to New Responses in a Weigl-Type Card Sorting Problem.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 38: 404–411. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。Timarová and Salaets (2001)在研究中檢視了口譯研究生的學習方式、動機、以及認知彈性。研究結果顯示,成功畢業的口譯學生具有認知彈性和抗壓性。

口譯常被視為大量消耗心力的活動。許多研究也透過實證方式,探究口譯員心理及生理上的壓力 (e.g., Klonowicz 1994Klonowicz, Tatiana 1994 “Putting One’s Heart into Simultaneous Interpretation.” In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, edited by Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 213–224. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Moser-Mercer, Künzli and Korac 1998Moser-Mercer, Barbara, Alexander Künzli, and Marina Korac 1998 “Prolonged Turns in Interpreting: Effects on Quality, Physiological and Psychological Stress (Pilot Study).” Interpreting 3 (1): 47–64. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; AIIC 2002AIIC (International Association of Conference Interpreters) 2002 “Workload Study – Full Report.” http://​aiic​.net​/page​/657​/interpreter​-workload​-study​-full​-report​/lang​/1; Kurz 2003 2003 “Physiological Stress during Simultaneous Interpreting: A Comparison of Experts and Novices.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 12: 51–67.Google Scholar; Moser-Mercer 2005Moser-Mercer, Barbara 2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar; Roziner and Shlesinger 2010Roziner, Ilan, and Miriam Shlesinger 2010 “Much Ado about Something Remote: Stress and Performance in Remote Interpreting.” Interpreting 12 (2): 214–247. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Korpal 2017Korpal, Paweł 2017Linguistic and Psychological Indicators of Stress in Simultaneous Interpreting. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Google Scholar)。口譯學者對於造成口譯員工作壓力的因素,以及減輕壓力負面影響的方法感到興趣。然而,口譯員的情緒反應研究仍乏人問津。本研究將探討口譯員對語音內容的情緒反應,主要以情緒感染同理心二詞描述口譯員的情緒反應。

情緒感染的定義為「不由自主地模仿並同步另一人的臉部表情、聲調、手勢及動作,藉此同化情緒」 (Hatfield, Cacioppo and Rapson 1994Hatfield, Elaine, John T. Cacioppo, and Richard L. Rapson 1994Emotional Contagion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar, 5)。情緒感染的例子在日常生活中隨處可見。例如,許多人在電視螢幕上看到開心的人,也會會心一笑;也有人發現,若身旁有難過、失望或迷惘的朋友,自己的心情也會惡化。

根據 Wróbel的說法 (2008Wróbel, Monika 2008 “O transferze emocji i nastrojów między ludźmi – mechanizm i psychologiczne wyznaczniki zarażenia afektywnego” [On the transfer of emotions and moods between people – the mechanism and psychological determinants of affective contagion]. Psychologia Społeczna 33 (8): 210–230.Google Scholar),情緒感染有兩個功能。第一個功能是促進人與人之間的交流。當人們在一起為相同目標行動時,會交流彼此的問題、疑惑,與成功時的喜悅。這些不需透過語言表達,經歷同樣的情緒或許就足以讓人們了解彼此、達成共識 (Wróbel 2008Wróbel, Monika 2008 “O transferze emocji i nastrojów między ludźmi – mechanizm i psychologiczne wyznaczniki zarażenia afektywnego” [On the transfer of emotions and moods between people – the mechanism and psychological determinants of affective contagion]. Psychologia Społeczna 33 (8): 210–230.Google Scholar, 220)。情緒感染讓一個人可以感受到對方的感覺,並了解他人的情緒地景 (emotional landscapes) (Hatfield, Rapson and Le 2009Hatfield, Elaine, Richard L. Rapson, and Yen-Chi L. Le 2009 “Emotional Contagion and Empathy.” In The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, edited by Jean Decety and William Ickes, 19–30, Boston, MA: MIT Press. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 19)。因此,情緒感染對人類溝通而言是重要元素。第二個功能是強化團體成員的聯繫。根據Barsade (2002Barsade, Sigal G. 2002 “The Ripple Effect: Emotional Contagion and Its Influence on Group Behavior.” Administrative Science Quarterly 47 (4): 644–675. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 644) 的觀察 ,正向的情緒感染可以促進合作、降低衝突風險,並改善工作表現。

對下列研究重要的發現,是情緒感染不是只會出現在面對面的時候 (Barsade 2002Barsade, Sigal G. 2002 “The Ripple Effect: Emotional Contagion and Its Influence on Group Behavior.” Administrative Science Quarterly 47 (4): 644–675. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Howard and Gengler 2001Howard, Daniel J., and Charles Gengler 2001 “Emotional Contagion Effect on Product Attitudes.” Journal of Consumer Research 28 (2): 189–201. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。當人觀賞情緒化的影片(Doherty 1998Doherty, R. William 1998 “Emotional Contagion and Social Judgment.” Motivation and Emotion 22 (3): 187–209. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)、圖片 (Surakka and Hietanen 1998Surakka, Veikko, and Jari K. Hietanen 1998 “Facial and Emotional Reactions to Duchenne and non-Duchenne Smiles.” International Journal of Psychophysiology 29: 23–33. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),或是聆聽情緒性的音檔時,都會同化自己的情緒 (Kappas, Hess and Scherer 1991Kappas, Arvid, Ursula Hess, and Klaus R. Scherer 1991 “Voice and Emotion.” In Fundamentals of Nonverbal Behavior: Studies in Emotion and Interaction, edited by Robert S. Feldman and Bernard Rime, 200–238. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar; Neumann and Strack 2000Neumann, Roland, and Fritz Strack 2000 “Mood Contagion: The Automatic Transfer of Mood between Persons.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (2): 211–223. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。會議口譯員在工作時,不一定會有與講者接觸的機會。在遠端口譯的案例中,口譯員也許是藉由影片看到講者。這對口譯過程影響劇甚。相較起現場口譯,遠端口譯更可能導致口譯表現下降 (Braun 2007Braun, Sabine 2007 “Interpreting in Small-Group Bilingual Videoconferences: Challenges and Adaptation Processes.” Interpreting 9 (1): 21–46. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 2013 2013 “Keep Your Distance? Remote Interpreting in Legal Proceedings: A Critical Assessment of a Growing Practice.” Interpreting 15 (2): 200–228. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Napier and Leneham 2011Napier, Jemina, and Marcel Leneham 2011 “‘It Was Difficult to Manage the Communication’: Testing the Feasibility of Video Remote Signed Language Interpreting in Court.” Journal of Interpretation 21 (1): 52–63.Google Scholar)。遠端口譯及視訊口譯具有距離感(Braun and Taylor 2012Braun, Sabine, and Judith L. Taylor eds. 2012Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar),這種距離可能會增加口譯員的壓力(Kurz 2002Kurz, Ingrid 2002 “Physiological Stress Responses during Media and Conference Interpreting.” In Interpreting in the 21st Century, edited by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 195–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Moser-Mercer 2005Moser-Mercer, Barbara 2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar; Roziner and Shlesinger 2010Roziner, Ilan, and Miriam Shlesinger 2010 “Much Ado about Something Remote: Stress and Performance in Remote Interpreting.” Interpreting 12 (2): 214–247. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。之前的研究結果顯示,受試者看情緒化影片時 (Doherty 1998Doherty, R. William 1998 “Emotional Contagion and Social Judgment.” Motivation and Emotion 22 (3): 187–209. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),會有情緒感染的情形,如口譯員也碰巧在遠端工作,便可以下此假設:在遠端同步口譯的研究中,也可以觀察到情緒感染的現象。

截至目前為止,我們可以假設情緒感染這個概念大致上與同理心吻合。Davis (1983Davis, Mark H. 1983 “Measuring Individual Differences in Empathy: Evidence for a Multidimensional Approach.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44 (1): 113–126. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 114) 對同理心的定義是「一個人觀察其他人的經驗而起的反應」。同理心是試圖用別人的方式思考及感受的過程 (Northouse 1979Northouse, Peter G. 1979 “Interpersonal Trust and Empathy in Nurse-Nurse Relationships.” Nursing Research 28 (6): 365–368. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 365)。除了同步情緒外,同理心也和接受他人的觀點、敏銳察覺他人的情緒狀態、理解他人在特定時間的經歷有關 (Davis 1994 1994Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar)。因此,同理心涉及情緒及認知的處理 (ibid.),所含括的範圍超過情緒感染 (cf. Wróbel 2016 2016Zarażenie afektywne: O procesie transferu emocji i nastroju między ludźmi [Affective contagion: On the transfer of emotions and moods between people]. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar, 19)。故本研究中將情緒感染視為同理心的最基本元素。心理學家將同理心分為情況式同理心及傾向式同理心。前者指的是在特定情況下的反應,後者是指個人的人格特質。

在本研究中,測試受試者對情緒性刺激的反應方式有以下幾種。斯辛二氏 (Schachter and Singer) 根據情緒心理的建構模組 (cf. Gross and Feldman Barrett 2011Gross, James J., and Lisa Feldman Barrett 2011 “Emotion Generation and Emotion Regulation: One or Two Depends on Your Point of View.” Emotion Review 3 (1): 8–16. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)提出情緒二因論 (1962Schachter, Stanley, and Jerome E. Singer 1962 “Cognitive, Social and Physiological Determinants of Emotional State.” Psychological Review 69 (5): 379–399. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。情緒主要由兩大要素組成:生理激勵及以社會參照為本的認知詮釋。根據心理建構模組,經驗的核心是透過個人的語意知識基礎加以詮釋,然後再進行認知標記。情緒一直是熱門的研究主題,是正負情緒向性及個人經驗交互作用下的產物。一個人經歷情緒時,就會產生生理激勵,只要使用測量自主神經系統的方法,像是皮膚電流反應(galvanic skin response, GSR),就可以探究上述情形。此方法的假設是皮膚電流反應出的流汗現象可以當作生理激勵以及交感神經系統(sympathetic nervous system, SNS) 的指標,另一個測量生理激勵的方法是測量心跳。心跳加速可以作為交感神經系統的活動指標。然而,以生理激勵為本的研究方法無法提供情緒向性的資訊。換言之,研究員無從得知一個經歷某種情緒的人如何詮釋生理激勵。本研究採用自陳為本的研究方法來測量情緒的認知詮釋。受試者透過問卷調查,自我評量當下的情緒。最常用來測量情緒強度的自陳工具之一,是由 Watson、Clark及Tellegen研發 (1988Watson, David, Lee Anna Clark, and Auke Tellegen 1988 “Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 (6): 1063–1070. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar) (cf. Crawford and Henry 2004Crawford, John R., and Julie D. Henry 2004 “The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct Validity, Measurement Properties and Normative Data in a Large Non-clinical Sample.” British Journal of Clinical Psychology 43: 245–265. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)的正負影響量表(positive and negative affect schedule, PANAS)。另一種測量情緒反應的方式是面部肌電圖(facial electromyography, EMG)。使用此方式時,研究員會在受試者的臉上放上數個電極。接著,肌肉神經電探器會紀錄面部肌肉所產生的電位 (Mauss and Robinson 2009Mauss, Iris B., and Michael D. Robinson 2009 “Measures of Emotion: A Review.” Cognition and Emotion 23 (2): 209–237.Google Scholar)。此研究方法的假設是面部肌電圖回報的圖樣,對照面部動作編碼系統(Facial Action Coding System, FACS) (Ekman and Friesen 1978Ekman, Paul, and Walter Friesen 1978The Facial Action Coding System (FACS): A Technique for the Measurement of Facial Action. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar)後,即可反應正向及負向情緒。如此一來,當一個人接收到刺激時,就可以及時測量受試者的情緒。

總結上述研究理論,在近幾十年來,針對口譯時的心理因素所進行的實證研究,已在口譯研究中慢慢紮根。事實上,許多口譯實證研究的先驅都是心理學家。他們研究同步口譯認知過程的各個面向,例如聽譯時間差(ear-voice span, EVS)(Oléron and Nanpon 1965Oléron, Pierre, and Hubert Nanpon 1965 “Recherches sur la traduction simultanée.” Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 62 (2): 73–94.Google Scholar; Kade 1967Kade, Otto 1967 “Zu einigen Besonderheiten des Simultandolmetschens.” Fremdsprachen 11 (1): 8–17.Google Scholar),或是講者的說話速度對口譯員表現的影響 (Gerver 1969Gerver, David 1969 “The Effects of Source Language Presentation Rate on the Performance of Simultaneous Conference Interpreters.” In Proceedings of the 2nd Louisville Conference on Rate and/or Frequency Controlled Speech, edited by Emerson Foulke, 162–184. Louisville, KY: University of Louisville.Google Scholar)。然而,一直到千禧年後,學界對於口譯的心理情感因素才開始更感興趣。這類實證研究所探討的因素包括:專業口譯員及新手口譯員的人格特質、心理及生理壓力,以及情緒穩定度等。儘管如此,著重於口譯員對翻譯內容的情緒反應的研究仍屬缺乏。因此,本研究致力於探討同步口譯中的情緒反應,補足實證研究上的缺口。本研究將使用皮膚電流反應作為情緒的生理測量工具,並用SUPIN問卷量化情緒的認知標記。

2.目標

本實驗性研究的目標是以實證的方式,判斷口譯員是否會受到講者情緒的影響,藉此牽動口譯員相同的主觀經驗。本研究旨在確認在同步口譯的情境下,是否可以觀察到情緒反應。此情境在認知上是個高認知負荷的語言轉換過程 (Gile 1995Gile, Daniel 1995Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Kurz 2002Kurz, Ingrid 2002 “Physiological Stress Responses during Media and Conference Interpreting.” In Interpreting in the 21st Century, edited by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 195–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Lambert 2004Lambert, Sylvie 2004 “Shared Attention during Sight Translation, Sight Interpretation and Simultaneous Interpretation.” Meta 49 (2): 294–306. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Christoffels and de Groot 2005Christoffels, Ingrid, and Annette de Groot 2005 “Simultaneous Interpreting: A Cognitive Perspective.” In Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, edited by Judith F. Kroll and Annette de Groot, 454–479. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar)。口譯員的情緒影響可能會反映在口譯員是否與講者情緒同步的情形。

為了達到此研究目標,研究員提出兩個假設:

假設一:

翻譯情緒性音檔時,口譯員會受到講者的情緒影響,而這會反應在生理激勵(GSR)上。翻譯中性音檔時,則不會有此情緒反應。

假設二:

翻譯情緒性音檔時,口譯員會受到講者的情緒影響,且口譯員SUPIN問卷的自陳情緒狀態會與講者一致。而在翻譯中性音檔時,口譯員會感覺自己沒有投入那麼多情緒。

3.材料

本研究使用兩段附影像的波蘭文真實音檔。本研究的設計與視訊會議口譯相似,這樣的設計有可能會增加口譯員及講者之間的距離 (Kurz 2002Kurz, Ingrid 2002 “Physiological Stress Responses during Media and Conference Interpreting.” In Interpreting in the 21st Century, edited by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 195–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Moser-Mercer 2005Moser-Mercer, Barbara 2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar; Braun and Taylor 2012Braun, Sabine, and Judith L. Taylor eds. 2012Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar)。選擇材料的過程中,首先,我們進行了一段非引導式的訪談,詢問三位會議口譯員在口譯時最常接觸的三個中性主題以及三個情緒性主題。根據這些回答,研究員選擇三個情緒性主題(戰爭、疾病、死亡)以及三個中性主題(商業、通訊、財經)。

接下來,研究員依照口譯員提出的主題挑選影像音檔,並邀請五位心理系四年級、已修完所有必修科目的學生,為三部情緒化及三部中性的影像音檔評分。這些心理系學生必須以李克特七分量表(Likert scale)為中性音檔評分(1分表示無任何情緒,7分則表示十分情緒化)。研究員選擇最不情緒化的音檔,加入實驗程序 (M = 1; SD = 0)。此音檔的主題是電話通訊的禮儀。在影片中,一名記者訪問一名溝通專家電話禮儀的技巧。整段訪談在波蘭電視台的攝影棚內進行,沒有任何背景音樂。

這些心理系的學生必須以李克特七分量表評斷情緒性音檔的難過程度 (1分表示完全不難過,7分則表示十分難過)。研究員選擇高難過指數的音檔,加入實驗程序 (M = 6; SD = .71)。此音檔的內容是一位記者訪問一對痛失愛子的夫妻。這對夫妻告訴記者他們在醫院發現孩子死去的過程。他們也說明自己試圖放下的過程。音檔中的三個人情緒都有明顯起伏。音檔沒有背景音樂。

選完實驗所需的兩個音檔後,研究員採用Nencki情緒詞彙列表 (NAWL, Riegel et al. 2015Riegel, Monika, Małgorzata Wierzba, Marek Wypych, Łukasz Żurawski, Katarzyna Jednoróg, Anna Grabowska, and Artur Marchewka 2015 “Nencki Affective Word List (NAWL): The Cultural Adaptation of the Berlin Affective Word List-Reloaded (BAWL-R) for Polish.” Behavior Research Methods 47 (4): 1222–1236. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。此列表上有2902個波蘭文中情緒化的字彙。研究員用此列表衡量兩個音檔中,難過分數超過2分的字彙數量(以李克特7分制量表衡量,1分表示低強度,7分表示高強度)。結果如表一表二所示:

表一中性音檔在Nencki情緒詞彙列表的評分
波蘭詞彙 英文翻譯 難過評分的平均數(根據NAWL)
szef 上司 2.23
pomijać 跳過某事物 2.78
表二情緒性音檔在Nencki情緒詞彙列表的評分
波蘭詞彙 英文翻譯 難過評分的平均數(根據NAWL)
wynik 結果 2.00
nikt 毫無一人 3.42
dziecko 孩子 2.00
lekarz 醫生 2.63
kończyć 使結束 3.54
umierać 5.77
nadzieja 希望 2.65
koniec 結束 3.00
życie 生命 3.19
czuć 感受 2.44
słaby 虛弱 3.77
przerażający 驚恐 2.11
zapominać 忘記 3.88
szok 震驚 3.15
koszmar 夢魘 3.65
brakować 想念一個人 5.41
pogrzebać 埋葬 5.46
trumna 棺木 4.58
pożegnanie 告別 5.33

在情緒性文本中,難過的平均指數為2分或更多的情緒性字有19個,中性文本中僅兩個這樣的詞彙,而這兩個詞彙的平均難過指數都不超過3分。

表三為用於後續研究的兩個音檔的資訊:

表三研究材料
字彙 長度(分:秒) 每分鐘字數 波蘭文本的迷霧指數(Jasnopis)
情緒性音檔 404 3:05 132.5 2/7 (非常容易)
中性音檔 406 3:03 134 2/7 (非常容易)

表三所示,為了降低混淆變項的影響,所有的音檔長度、每分鐘的字數、及波蘭文的迷霧指數,也就是Jasnopis (Gruszczyński and Ogrodniczuk 2016Gruszczyński, Włodzimierz, and Maciej Ogrodniczuk 2016Jasnopis czyli mierzenie zrozumiałości polskich tekstów użytkowych [Jasnopis – measuring comprehensibility of Polish non-literary texts]. Warsaw: Oficyna Wydawnicza ASPRA.Google Scholar) (chi2 (1) = .333; p = .564) 均一致。

圖一簡述了選擇研究材料的過程:

圖一選擇研究材料
圖一

4.受試者

本研究的樣本由20位受試者組成(10位女性及10位男性)。所有受試者均為波蘭文的母語人士。研究員根據下列標準選出受試者:需具備至少兩年的專業同步口譯經驗、完成學士程度的口譯訓練、年齡為26到43歲(M = 31; SD = 4.61) 。女性受試者的平均年齡為 (M = 30.8; SD = 3.62) ,男性受試者的平均年齡為 (M = 31.2; SD = 5.63) 。受試者的口譯經驗平均為2年至14年 (M = 5.45; SD = 3.27) ,女性受試者的平均為 (M = 4.8; SD = 2.44) ,男性受試者的平均是 (M = 6.1; SD = 3.96) 。

5.研究方法

本研究根據斯辛二氏的情緒二因論,採取了兩種測量方法。其一是為了要量化生理激勵,其二則是測量情緒的認知標記。

研究使用皮膚電流反應 (GSR) 方法來測量情緒反應。皮膚電導指數上升代表生理激勵,因此GSR常用來作為情緒激發的標記 (Bradley, Cuthbert and Lang 1990Bradley, Margaret M., Bruce N. Cuthbert, and Peter J. Lang 1990 “Startle Reflex Modification: Emotion or Attention?Psychophysiology 27 (5): 513–522. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Cook et al. 1991Cook, Edwin W., Larry H. Hawk, Tammy L. Davis, and Victor E. Stevenson 1991 “Affective Individual Differences and Startle Reflex Modulation.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology 100: 5–13. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Waugh, Thompson and Gotlib 2011Waugh, Christian E., Renee J. Thompson, and Ian H. Gotlib 2011 “Flexible Emotional Responsiveness in Trait Resilience.” Emotion 11 (5): 1059–1067. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Monfort et al. 2014Monfort, Samuel S., Łukasz D. Kaczmarek, Todd B. Kashdan, Dariusz Drążkowski, Michał Kosakowski, Przemysław Guzik, Tomasz Krauze, and Asmir Gracanin 2014 “Capitalizing on the Success of Romantic Partners: A Laboratory Investigation on Subjective, Facial, and Physiological Emotional Processing.” Personality and Individual Differences 68: 149–153. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。本研究使用PsychLab SC 放大器測量皮膚電流反應的數量。為了取得數據,受試者在非慣用手的食指及中指指節戴上兩個可重複使用、直徑8毫米的氯化銀電極。為遵行PsychLab SC放大器建議的有效性標準,研究採用0.02 μS作為皮膚導電的最低測量下限,並採用Psych-lab數據搜集軟體來記錄皮膚導電,其中採用取樣頻率為1000 Hz,閒置取樣頻率為500 Hz。

數據透過PsychLab分析軟體進行分析。為了研究實驗操作對生理激勵產生的改變,實驗過程中,研究員進行了三次皮膚電流反應測量:

(1) 實驗前 (基準3:04分) ; (2)翻譯中性音檔的全程 (3:03分) ;及(3) 翻譯情緒性音檔的全程 (3:05分) 。在這三次設定不同實驗的條件中,皮膚電流反應超過 0.02 μS的次數均被記錄下來,作為此實驗中生理激勵的操作定義。

為了測量受試者的自陳情緒狀態,本實驗使用了SUPIN-S30 (Brzozowski 2010Brzozowski, Piotr 2010Skala Uczuć Pozytywnych i Negatywnych (SUPIN). Polska adaptacja skali PANAS Davida Watsona i Lee Anny Clark. Podręcznik [SUPIN – Polish adaptation of PANAS – Positive and Negative Affect Schedule by David Watson and Lee Anna Clark. A manual]. Warsaw: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych.Google Scholar)11.SUPIN是由波蘭心理學會心理測驗實驗室在波蘭所使用的問卷,請參考:http://​www​.en​.practest​.com​.pl​/search​/evide​_searcher​/SUPIN.問卷,也就是波蘭版的正負影響量表 (PANAS) (Watson, Clark and Tellegen 1988Watson, David, Lee Anna Clark, and Auke Tellegen 1988 “Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 (6): 1063–1070. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),用以測量當下的情緒狀態,並參照情境式同理的理論概念。S30版本的工具涵蓋了30個形容詞,其中15個標記為負面情緒,剩餘的15個則是正面情緒。實驗受試者需在李克特五分量表上作答,一分代表缺乏情緒,五分則代表在某個時間點感受到強烈的情緒。所有受試者在實驗過程中均完成了三份SUPIN-S30問卷:(1) 第一次口譯前(基準值)(2) 翻譯完中性音檔後 (3) 翻譯完情緒性音檔後。

6.實驗程序

本實驗所有程序均遵守人體試驗倫理規範,亦獲得亞當密茨凱維奇大學心理學研究所倫理委員會批准。在了解實驗程序後,每位受試者都需簽署知情同意書。受試者得知他們需為兩份三分鐘演講(附影像音檔)進行波蘭文譯入英文的同步口譯。

實驗開始前,受試者需填寫一份受訪者特性的問卷,內容包含:性別、年齡及口譯經驗。完成後,口譯員在非慣用手的食指及中指指節戴上兩個GSR電極,紀錄受試者的GSR基準。接著,受試者須填寫第一份SUPIN-S30問卷。完成問卷後,受試者進入實驗程序,進行中性語音及情緒性語音的翻譯。受試者翻譯音檔的順序採用對抗平衡設計。每翻譯完一份音檔,口譯員就需填寫一份SUPIN-S30問卷。這個程序是為了研究口譯員在不同實驗條件下,自陳情緒狀態的改變。實驗結束後,研究員簡單說明實驗內容,讓受試者了解實驗的研究目標跟預期結果。

7.研究結果

為了驗證第一個假設,本研究用ANOVA重複測量口譯員在實驗過程中對刺激(中性音檔和情緒性音檔)的生理反應。結果顯示,實驗過程中GSR的變化在統計上有顯著差異,說明音檔類型(中性和情緒性)為受試者生理激勵(F(2;38) = 38.299; p < .001, η p 2 = .668)的主要影響。配對比較證實了情緒性語音 (M = 27.95; SD = 12.51) 和中性語音 (M = 22.35; SD = 10.33) 在統計上具有顯著差異 (p = .014)。在基準條件下觀察到的GSR值最低 (M = 13.25; SD = 6.82),這樣的結果與預期一致。所有條件的GSR平均值顯示於圖二

研究員使用ANOVA進行重複測量,分析自陳情緒狀態的差異(假設二)。結果顯示,SUPIN-S30問卷在實驗過程的分數變化,在統計上有顯著差異,顯示音檔類型(中性和情緒性)為受試者自陳情緒反應的主要影響,F (1.498; 28.456) = 14.732; p < .001, η 2 = .437。配對比較證實了情緒性語音 (M = 25.55; SD = 9.65) 和中性語音 (M = 20.55; SD = 7.19) 有統計上的顯著差異 (p = .002)。SUPIN-S30問卷的最低分數出現在基準條件 (M = 16.85; SD = 2.82) ,這樣的結果與預期一致。圖三呈現所有條件負向情緒的SUPIN-S30平均分數。

圖二所有條件下皮膚電流反應的平均數
圖二
圖三所有條件下的負向情緒的SUPIN-S30平均分數
圖三

除了測量負向情緒的認知標籤,實驗也分析SUPIN-S30問卷表示難過指數的兩個單獨項目,也就是przygnębiony (英譯:難過) 和zmartwiony (英譯:沮喪)。在對przygnębiony項目重複進行ANOVA測量顯示,音檔類型對自陳難過有重要影響,F(2; 38) = 30.957; p < .001, η 2 = .62。配對比較證實了情緒性語音 (M = 2.65; SD = 1.14) 和中性語音 (M = 1.45; SD = .83) 在統計上具有顯著差異 (p < .001),而在基準條件下觀察到的分數最低 (M = 1.15; SD = .49)。SUPIN-S30的zmartwiony項目也有類似的結果:情緒性音檔(M = 2.05; SD = 1.05),中性音檔 (M = 1.3; SD = .58),基線 (M = 1.25; SD = .64),F(2; 38) = 16.412; p < .001, η 2 = .463。配對比較證實情緒性語音和中性語音的差異達到顯著性差異 (p = .001)。

雖然正向情緒不是本研究重點,SUPIN工具也提供自陳正向情緒狀態的功能,所以ANOVA也對正向情緒進行重複測量。分析結果如下:情緒性音檔的自陳正向情緒 (M = 43.35; SD = 13.48),中性音檔的自陳正向情緒 (M = 47.15; SD = 9.75),和基準條件,也就是實驗前的自陳正向情緒 (M = 47.4; SD = 12.78)。分析結果顯示,音檔類型對自陳正向情緒狀態有重要影響,F(2; 38) = 3.235; p = .05, η 2 = .146。儘管如此,配對比較顯示情緒性語音和中性語音的差異未達統計顯著 (p = .106)。然而,比較平均數後發現情緒性音檔的正向情緒分數較低。圖四呈現所有條件下正向情緒的SUPIN-S30平均分數。

圖四所有條件下的正向情緒的SUPIN-S30平均分數
圖四

實驗也證實生理激勵和自陳負向情緒是否有正相關。前者由皮膚電流反應次數測量,後者則是由SUPIN-S30的負向情緒分數測量。結果顯示兩者有正相關 (r = .331; p = .01)。這可能指向生理情緒反應和自陳情緒狀態間有一致性。

此外,研究員進行了一系列的獨立樣本t檢定,以測試女性和男性受試者對情緒性音檔的反應是否存在差異。在所有的測量當中,性別差異統計都未具顯著差異。這些測量包含GSR(p = .642)、SUPIN-S30的負向情緒分數 (p = .982)、SUPIN-S30的przygnębiony項目分數 (p = .569)、SUPIN-S30的zmartwiony項目分數 (p = .542),和SUPIN-S30的正向情緒分數 (p = .451)。上述結果指出男性和女性受試者對情緒性語音的反應並無樣本差異。

總的來說,除了SUPIN-S30的正向情緒分數沒有統計顯著結果,兩個假設都在分析過程中得到證實。結果顯示口譯員的確可能受到講者的情緒影響。研究員對情緒的生理測量 (GSR) 和心理測量 (SUPIN-S30) 進行三角測量,心理測量包含兩個標記難過的獨立問卷項目。結果顯示,口譯員在同步口譯過程中,可能受到講者的情緒影響。

8.討論

本實驗研究的主要目標是驗證口譯員是否會被講者的情緒狀態所影響。本研究旨在測試由波蘭語(A語言)譯入英語(B語言)的同步口譯過程中,是否會觀察到同理心,而情緒感染 (Hatfield, Cacioppo and Rapson 1994Hatfield, Elaine, John T. Cacioppo, and Richard L. Rapson 1994Emotional Contagion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar)正是同理心的一大要素。根據原始情緒感染理論 (Hatfield, Cacioppo and Rapson 1994Hatfield, Elaine, John T. Cacioppo, and Richard L. Rapson 1994Emotional Contagion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar; Hatfield, Rapson and Le 2009Hatfield, Elaine, Richard L. Rapson, and Yen-Chi L. Le 2009 “Emotional Contagion and Empathy.” In The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, edited by Jean Decety and William Ickes, 19–30, Boston, MA: MIT Press. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),情緒感染是構成同理心的基本要素,而且會自動激發。以原始情緒感染理論來看,鑒於人們也會被影片中人的情緒感染(Doherty 1998Doherty, R. William 1998 “Emotional Contagion and Social Judgment.” Motivation and Emotion 22 (3): 187–209. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),研究員假設影片訊息輸入的同步口譯也能觀察到相同的過程。研究結果的確顯示口譯員容易被講者的情緒感染,而這反應在身體反應和自陳情緒上。

本研究顯示同步口譯員會產生和講者相似的生理激勵 (GSR) 和情緒狀態(SUPIN-S30分數),這與先前關於口譯過程中,情緒處理和同理心的理論思考相呼應。Wróbel (2008Wróbel, Monika 2008 “O transferze emocji i nastrojów między ludźmi – mechanizm i psychologiczne wyznaczniki zarażenia afektywnego” [On the transfer of emotions and moods between people – the mechanism and psychological determinants of affective contagion]. Psychologia Społeczna 33 (8): 210–230.Google Scholar) 認為情緒感染可能會促進溝通。本研究結果顯示,口譯員會傾向和講者情緒同化,而這可能幫助他們了解源語言輸入的意圖和情緒。然而,未來應該進一步研究同理心在口譯扮演的角色以及情緒感染對口譯品質的影響,以驗證此結論。

同步口譯過程中的情緒處理包含哪些心理機制還有待討論。基本上,可以用情緒感染解釋為何聽情緒性音檔會產生較明顯的生理激勵。可以將此效果理解為社會誘導情感 (Goldstein and Michaels 1985Goldstein, Arnold P., and Gérald Y. Michaels 1985Empathy: Development, Training, and Consequences. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar; Hsee, Hatfield and Chemtob 1992Hsee, Christopher K., Elaine Hatfield, and Claude Chemtob 1992 “Assessments of Emotional States of Others: Conscious Judgments versus Emotional Contagion.” Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 11 (2): 119–128. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar),意即一個人的情緒狀態是由他人可觀察的情緒引起的。然而,正如先前所說,情緒感染是同理心的基本要素,涉及情緒及認知處理過程。研究員傾向認為,口譯員可能會同情講者的情緒,而不只是單純模仿情緒,這也能透過生理激勵和難過自陳報告看出。不過為了確保口譯員的情緒反應可歸因於同情心,受試者的實驗後訪談可用於未來研究。總結以上論述,此研究結果顯示口譯員容易被講者的情緒影響。儘管如此,還需要更多研究描繪同步口譯中情緒反應的心理機制。

9.研究限制及未來研究

本研究的限制之一,是高認知負荷壓力可能引起的生理反應,而三角測量研究方法減少這樣的影響。為了測試受試者的生理反應是否由情緒觸發,研究員把皮膚電流反應 (GSR) 和SUPIN進行三角測量。SUPIN分數和GSR的正相關可能暗示GSR的確是情緒反應的標記。此外,兩種音檔 (中性和情緒性) 在長度、每分鐘的字數,和波蘭文本的迷霧指數Jasnopis (Gruszczyński and Ogrodniczuk 2016Gruszczyński, Włodzimierz, and Maciej Ogrodniczuk 2016Jasnopis czyli mierzenie zrozumiałości polskich tekstów użytkowych [Jasnopis – measuring comprehensibility of Polish non-literary texts]. Warsaw: Oficyna Wydawnicza ASPRA.Google Scholar) 均一致。因此,可以合理推測在整個實驗過程中,進行兩種任務的認知努力以及認知負荷引起的生理壓力應該差不多,而過程中增加的GSR是受自變數的影響(即語音的情緒性)。

另一個備受批評的研究限制是控制實驗的生態效度低。的確,如果能在實驗室外、在真實的工作環境中測試口譯員如何處理情緒性語音會很有趣。本實驗使用皮膚電流反應可能會降低研究的生態效度,因為這限制口譯員在口譯過程中的肢體活動。此外,如上所述,目前還無法確定生理測量能否正確區分同理心、同情心和情緒感染 (Zhou, Valiente and Eisenberg 2003Zhou, Qing, Carlos Valiente, and Nancy Eisenberg 2003 “Empathy and Its Measurement.” In Positive Psychological Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures, edited by Shane J. Lopez and C. Richard Snyder, 269–284. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。

重要的是,本實驗設定是用影片配合音檔進行口譯,受試者並沒有直接接觸講者。也就是說,遠端條件會在口譯員和講者間製造距離感 (Kurz 2002Kurz, Ingrid 2002 “Physiological Stress Responses during Media and Conference Interpreting.” In Interpreting in the 21st Century, edited by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 195–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Braun and Taylor 2012Braun, Sabine, and Judith L. Taylor eds. 2012Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar),進而影響口譯表現 (Braun 2007Braun, Sabine 2007 “Interpreting in Small-Group Bilingual Videoconferences: Challenges and Adaptation Processes.” Interpreting 9 (1): 21–46. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 2013 2013 “Keep Your Distance? Remote Interpreting in Legal Proceedings: A Critical Assessment of a Growing Practice.” Interpreting 15 (2): 200–228. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar; Napier and Leneham 2011Napier, Jemina, and Marcel Leneham 2011 “‘It Was Difficult to Manage the Communication’: Testing the Feasibility of Video Remote Signed Language Interpreting in Court.” Journal of Interpretation 21 (1): 52–63.Google Scholar)。這樣一來,本研究便無法回答口譯員在口譯現場如何與講者情緒同步的問題。未來研究可以比較口譯員在現場和遠端口譯不同的情緒反應。

如前所述,口譯過程的情緒處理並沒有太多的實證研究。本研究觀察從波蘭文 (A語言)到英文(B語言)的同步口譯過程中,口譯員的情緒反應。研究也可延伸到逐步口譯;可以比較兩種模式引發口譯員的情緒強度。另一個想法是比較A進B和B進A兩種口譯。本研究的情緒性音檔目的是引發受試者難過的情緒,未來也可以用快樂講者的音檔做類似的實驗。比較正向和負向情緒所引發的情緒反應可能產生有趣的結果。最後,將此實驗應用於在醫院工作的社區口譯員想必也會很有趣,因為他們經常處於情緒化的工作環境中。接觸經歷創傷者可能會觸發社區口譯員的二度創傷,而這會反應在口譯對話產生的情緒反應。

10.結論

本研究的目的是檢視口譯員是否會對講者的情緒產生反應。結果顯示口譯員的確容易受到講者情緒的影響。比起中性語音,口譯員在翻譯情緒性語音時,會有更明顯的生理反應(皮膚電流反應次數更多)以及自陳情緒狀態(反應在SUPIN-S30更高的分數)。研究結果顯示,可以從像同步口譯這種高認知負荷的語言轉換過程觀察到口譯員的情緒反應。

研究員相信所獲得的結果可能具有重要的實踐和教學意義。Hale (2007Hale, Sandra B. 2007Community Interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar, 198) 提出:「研究、訓練和實踐必須能夠相輔相成。實踐產生研究問題,研究為問題提供答案,訓練則把答案納入課程來促進實踐。」口譯研究中提出,情緒反應和同理心可能是影響口譯員資賦的要素 (Kopczyński 1981Kopczyński, Andrzej 1981 “Deviance in Conference Interpreting.” In The Mission of the Translator Today, edited by Andrzej Kopczyński, Anatol Hanftwurcel, Ewa Karska and Lew Riwin, 399–404. Warsaw: Polska Agencja Interpress.Google Scholar; Bidoli 2002Bidoli, Cynthia 2002 “Spoken-Language and Signed-Language Interpretation: Are They Really So Different?” In Interpreting in the 21st Century, edited by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 171–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar)。本研究證實口譯員會和講者的情緒同化。這可能讓口譯員有能力了解講者演說內容所夾帶的情緒。口譯員訓練中可以討論處理講者情緒的重要性。另一方面,口譯員若天天接觸情緒性內容,也會更容易產生職業過勞,這也應該在口譯教育多加強調。總體來說,需要更多研究探討同理心和情緒反應在口譯員表現擔任的角色。

總結以上,本研究為補強同步口譯情緒處理研究的不足,踏出了一步。情緒處理身為口譯實務的心理要素之一,口譯方面的研究仍然相當少,本研究用控制實驗以及生理和心理的三角測量檢視情緒處理。然而,還需要更多研究才能更全面了解情緒處理過程以及口譯員如何同理講者。

致謝

感謝亞當米奇衛茲大學波茲蘭校區凱維奇大學心理學研究所的Łukasz Kaczmarek提供我們使用實驗所需設備。

Paweł Korpal是由波蘭科學基金會(FNP)所贊助。

注意

1.SUPIN是由波蘭心理學會心理測驗實驗室在波蘭所使用的問卷,請參考:http://​www​.en​.practest​.com​.pl​/search​/evide​_searcher​/SUPIN.

參考文獻

AIIC (International Association of Conference Interpreters)
Barsade, Sigal G.
2002 “The Ripple Effect: Emotional Contagion and Its Influence on Group Behavior.” Administrative Science Quarterly 47 (4): 644–675. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Bidoli, Cynthia
2002 “Spoken-Language and Signed-Language Interpretation: Are They Really So Different?” In Interpreting in the 21st Century, edited by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 171–180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier
2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 85–105. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Bradley, Margaret M., Bruce N. Cuthbert, and Peter J. Lang
1990 “Startle Reflex Modification: Emotion or Attention?Psychophysiology 27 (5): 513–522. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, Sabine
2007 “Interpreting in Small-Group Bilingual Videoconferences: Challenges and Adaptation Processes.” Interpreting 9 (1): 21–46. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Keep Your Distance? Remote Interpreting in Legal Proceedings: A Critical Assessment of a Growing Practice.” Interpreting 15 (2): 200–228. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Braun, Sabine, and Judith L. Taylor
eds. 2012Videoconference and Remote Interpreting in Criminal Proceedings. Antwerp: Intersentia.Google Scholar
Brisau, André, Rita Godijns, and Chris Meuleman
1994 “Towards a Psycholinguistic Profile of the Interpreter.” Meta 39 (1): 87–94. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Brzozowski, Piotr
2010Skala Uczuć Pozytywnych i Negatywnych (SUPIN). Polska adaptacja skali PANAS Davida Watsona i Lee Anny Clark. Podręcznik [SUPIN – Polish adaptation of PANAS – Positive and Negative Affect Schedule by David Watson and Lee Anna Clark. A manual]. Warsaw: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych.Google Scholar
Christoffels, Ingrid, and Annette de Groot
2005 “Simultaneous Interpreting: A Cognitive Perspective.” In Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, edited by Judith F. Kroll and Annette de Groot, 454–479. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, Edwin W., Larry H. Hawk, Tammy L. Davis, and Victor E. Stevenson
1991 “Affective Individual Differences and Startle Reflex Modulation.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology 100: 5–13. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Crawford, John R., and Julie D. Henry
2004 “The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS): Construct Validity, Measurement Properties and Normative Data in a Large Non-clinical Sample.” British Journal of Clinical Psychology 43: 245–265. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Davis, Mark H.
1983 “Measuring Individual Differences in Empathy: Evidence for a Multidimensional Approach.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44 (1): 113–126. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
1994Empathy: A Social Psychological Approach. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Davitti, Elena, Eloisa Monteoliva, Demi Krystallidou, and Sabine Braun
2016 “Multimodal Analysis of a Multimodal Activity: Methodological Explorations of Interpreter-Mediated Interaction.” Paper presented at the Critical Link 8 Conference, Edinburgh, UK.
Doherty, R. William
1998 “Emotional Contagion and Social Judgment.” Motivation and Emotion 22 (3): 187–209. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Ekman, Paul, and Walter Friesen
1978The Facial Action Coding System (FACS): A Technique for the Measurement of Facial Action. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
Eysenck, Hans J., and Sybil B. G. Eysenck
1975Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R Adult). San Diego, CA: EdITS.Google Scholar
Gerver, David
1969 “The Effects of Source Language Presentation Rate on the Performance of Simultaneous Conference Interpreters.” In Proceedings of the 2nd Louisville Conference on Rate and/or Frequency Controlled Speech, edited by Emerson Foulke, 162–184. Louisville, KY: University of Louisville.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel
1995Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, Arnold P., and Gérald Y. Michaels
1985Empathy: Development, Training, and Consequences. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Grant, David A., and Esta A. Berg
1948 “A Behavioural Analysis of Degree of Reinforcement and Ease of Shifting to New Responses in a Weigl-Type Card Sorting Problem.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 38: 404–411. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Gross, James J., and Lisa Feldman Barrett
2011 “Emotion Generation and Emotion Regulation: One or Two Depends on Your Point of View.” Emotion Review 3 (1): 8–16. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Gruszczyński, Włodzimierz, and Maciej Ogrodniczuk
2016Jasnopis czyli mierzenie zrozumiałości polskich tekstów użytkowych [Jasnopis – measuring comprehensibility of Polish non-literary texts]. Warsaw: Oficyna Wydawnicza ASPRA.Google Scholar
Hale, Sandra B.
2007Community Interpreting. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Hatfield, Elaine, John T. Cacioppo, and Richard L. Rapson
1994Emotional Contagion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hatfield, Elaine, Richard L. Rapson, and Yen-Chi L. Le
2009 “Emotional Contagion and Empathy.” In The Social Neuroscience of Empathy, edited by Jean Decety and William Ickes, 19–30, Boston, MA: MIT Press. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Hermans, Hubert
2004Prestatie Motivatie Test [Achievement motivation test]. Lisse: Harcourt Test Publishers.Google Scholar
Howard, Daniel J., and Charles Gengler
2001 “Emotional Contagion Effect on Product Attitudes.” Journal of Consumer Research 28 (2): 189–201. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Hsee, Christopher K., Elaine Hatfield, and Claude Chemtob
1992 “Assessments of Emotional States of Others: Conscious Judgments versus Emotional Contagion.” Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 11 (2): 119–128. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Kade, Otto
1967 “Zu einigen Besonderheiten des Simultandolmetschens.” Fremdsprachen 11 (1): 8–17.Google Scholar
1968Zufall und Gesetzmäßigkeit in der Übersetzung. Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Kappas, Arvid, Ursula Hess, and Klaus R. Scherer
1991 “Voice and Emotion.” In Fundamentals of Nonverbal Behavior: Studies in Emotion and Interaction, edited by Robert S. Feldman and Bernard Rime, 200–238. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klonowicz, Tatiana
1994 “Putting One’s Heart into Simultaneous Interpretation.” In Bridging the Gap: Empirical Research in Simultaneous Interpretation, edited by Sylvie Lambert and Barbara Moser-Mercer, 213–224. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Kopczyński, Andrzej
1981 “Deviance in Conference Interpreting.” In The Mission of the Translator Today, edited by Andrzej Kopczyński, Anatol Hanftwurcel, Ewa Karska and Lew Riwin, 399–404. Warsaw: Polska Agencja Interpress.Google Scholar
Korpal, Paweł
2017Linguistic and Psychological Indicators of Stress in Simultaneous Interpreting. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.Google Scholar
Kurz, Ingrid
2002 “Physiological Stress Responses during Media and Conference Interpreting.” In Interpreting in the 21st Century, edited by Giuliana Garzone and Maurizio Viezzi, 195–202. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2003 “Physiological Stress during Simultaneous Interpreting: A Comparison of Experts and Novices.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 12: 51–67.Google Scholar
Lambert, Sylvie
2004 “Shared Attention during Sight Translation, Sight Interpretation and Simultaneous Interpretation.” Meta 49 (2): 294–306. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Mauss, Iris B., and Michael D. Robinson
2009 “Measures of Emotion: A Review.” Cognition and Emotion 23 (2): 209–237.Google Scholar
Monfort, Samuel S., Łukasz D. Kaczmarek, Todd B. Kashdan, Dariusz Drążkowski, Michał Kosakowski, Przemysław Guzik, Tomasz Krauze, and Asmir Gracanin
2014 “Capitalizing on the Success of Romantic Partners: A Laboratory Investigation on Subjective, Facial, and Physiological Emotional Processing.” Personality and Individual Differences 68: 149–153. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Moser-Mercer, Barbara
2005 “Remote Interpreting: The Crucial Role of Presence.” Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Swiss Association of Applied Linguistics) 81: 73–97.Google Scholar
Moser-Mercer, Barbara, Alexander Künzli, and Marina Korac
1998 “Prolonged Turns in Interpreting: Effects on Quality, Physiological and Psychological Stress (Pilot Study).” Interpreting 3 (1): 47–64. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Myers-Briggs, Isabel
1962Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Napier, Jemina, and Marcel Leneham
2011 “‘It Was Difficult to Manage the Communication’: Testing the Feasibility of Video Remote Signed Language Interpreting in Court.” Journal of Interpretation 21 (1): 52–63.Google Scholar
Neumann, Roland, and Fritz Strack
2000 “Mood Contagion: The Automatic Transfer of Mood between Persons.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (2): 211–223. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Northouse, Peter G.
1979 “Interpersonal Trust and Empathy in Nurse-Nurse Relationships.” Nursing Research 28 (6): 365–368. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Oléron, Pierre, and Hubert Nanpon
1965 “Recherches sur la traduction simultanée.” Journal de psychologie normale et pathologique 62 (2): 73–94.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
2011 “Assessing Aptitude for Interpreting: The SynCloze Test.” Interpreting 13 (1): 106–120. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Ramos Caro, Marina, and Ana Rojo
2014 “ ‘Feeling’ Audio Description: Exploring the Impact of AD on Emotional Response.” Translation Spaces 3: 133–150. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Riegel, Monika, Małgorzata Wierzba, Marek Wypych, Łukasz Żurawski, Katarzyna Jednoróg, Anna Grabowska, and Artur Marchewka
2015 “Nencki Affective Word List (NAWL): The Cultural Adaptation of the Berlin Affective Word List-Reloaded (BAWL-R) for Polish.” Behavior Research Methods 47 (4): 1222–1236. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Rojo, Ana, Marina Ramos Caro, and Javier Valenzuela
2014 “The Emotional Impact of Translation: A Heart Rate Study.” Journal of Pragmatics 71: 31–44. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Rosiers, Alexandra, June Eyckmans, and Daniel Bauwens
2011 “A Story of Attitudes and Aptitudes? Investigating Individual Difference Variables within the Context of Interpreting.” Interpreting 13 (1): 53–69. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Roziner, Ilan, and Miriam Shlesinger
2010 “Much Ado about Something Remote: Stress and Performance in Remote Interpreting.” Interpreting 12 (2): 214–247. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Schachter, Stanley, and Jerome E. Singer
1962 “Cognitive, Social and Physiological Determinants of Emotional State.” Psychological Review 69 (5): 379–399. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Schweda Nicholson, Nancy
2005 “Personality Characteristics of Interpreter Trainees: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI).” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13: 109–142.Google Scholar
Seeber, Kilian
2012 “Multimodal Input in Simultaneous Interpreting: An Eye-Tracking Experiment.” In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference TRANSLATA, Translation and Interpreting Research: Yesterday – Today – Tomorrow, edited by Lew Zybatov, Alena Petrova and Michael Ustaszewski, 341–347. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2017 “Multimodal Processing in Simultaneous Interpreting.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited by John W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 461–475. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Surakka, Veikko, and Jari K. Hietanen
1998 “Facial and Emotional Reactions to Duchenne and non-Duchenne Smiles.” International Journal of Psychophysiology 29: 23–33. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Šarka, and Harry Ungoed-Thomas
2008 “Admission Testing for Interpreting Courses.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (1): 29–46. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Šarka, and Heidi Salaets
2011 “Learning Styles, Motivation and Cognitive Flexibility in Interpreter Training: Self-Selection and Aptitude.” Interpreting 13 (1): 31–52. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Vermunt, Jan, and Frank van Rijswijk
1987Inventaris Leerstijlen [Inventory of learning styles]. Tilburg: K.U. Brabant/Open Universiteit.Google Scholar
Vranjes, Jelena, Hanneke Bot, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône
2015 “Multimodal Feedback Mechanisms in Interpreter-Mediated Interaction.” Paper presented at the 14th International Pragmatics Conference (Antwerp).
Vranjes, Jelena, Annelies Jehoul, Kurt Feyaerts, and Geert Brône
2016 “Dual Feedback in Triadic Interactions: On the Interplay between Gesture and Gaze.” Paper presented at the ISGS Conference 2016: Gesture, Creativity, Multimodality (Paris).
Wadensjö, Cecilia
1998Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Watson, David, Lee Anna Clark, and Auke Tellegen
1988 “Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 (6): 1063–1070. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Waugh, Christian E., Renee J. Thompson, and Ian H. Gotlib
2011 “Flexible Emotional Responsiveness in Trait Resilience.” Emotion 11 (5): 1059–1067. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Wróbel, Monika
2008 “O transferze emocji i nastrojów między ludźmi – mechanizm i psychologiczne wyznaczniki zarażenia afektywnego” [On the transfer of emotions and moods between people – the mechanism and psychological determinants of affective contagion]. Psychologia Społeczna 33 (8): 210–230.Google Scholar
2016Zarażenie afektywne: O procesie transferu emocji i nastroju między ludźmi [Affective contagion: On the transfer of emotions and moods between people]. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar
Zagar Galvão, Elena
2009 “Speech and Gesture in the Booth – a Descriptive Approach to Multimodality in Simultaneous Interpreting.” In Translation and the (Trans)formation of Identities. Selected Papers of the CETRA Research Seminar in Translation Studies 2008, edited by Dries De Crom, 1–26. Leuven: CETRA.Google Scholar
Zhou, Qing, Carlos Valiente, and Nancy Eisenberg
2003 “Empathy and Its Measurement.” In Positive Psychological Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures, edited by Shane J. Lopez and C. Richard Snyder, 269–284. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar

通訊地址

Paweł Korpal

亞當米奇衛茲大學波茲蘭校區英文學院

al.Niepodległości 4

61–874 POZNAŃ

Poland

pkorpal@wa.amu.edu.pl

Co-author information

Aleksandra Jasielska
亞當米奇衛茲大學波茲蘭校區社會科學院
aleksandra.jasielska@amu.edu.pl