Have you ever made negative comments about your interpreting performance or felt lost in interpreting assignments without understanding why? Our work exposes us to a multitude of unpredictable situations where high-quality performance is expected every time. To manage the occupational stress that accompanies our work, interpreters can use the Demand-Control Schema (DC-S) tool to analyse all aspects of interpreting assignments.
Each of us brings a unique blend of knowledge, skills, experiences, and competencies to our work, which informs how we respond to various demands in an interpreting assignment. Using these strengths, interpreters can actively reflect on the demands of the assignment and our own coping mechanisms, which is crucial not only for our professional and personal growth but also for managing occupational stress, preventing burnout, and ensuring career longevity. Demand Control Schema
I was first introduced to the DC-S during my Diploma of Interpreting course, where we used it as a pre-assignment tool to prepare for mock scenario assessments. Upon achieving my Diploma of Interpreting qualification and obtaining NAATI Certification as a Certified Provisional Interpreter (CPI), I integrated the DC-S into my professional practice to assess job suitability based on my skill level.
In 2019, after working as a CPI interpreter for four years, I attended a DC-S workshop. Collaborating with my peers, we used the DC-S to reflect on various interpreting scenarios. This deep dive into situations that didn’t go as planned made me realise the full potential of utilising the DC-S not only before assignments but also during and after them. At that time, I was considering leaving the industry due to a lack of support avenues, symptoms of burnout, and an inability to understand why I felt so negatively about my performance. I had been personalising my work rather than looking at it objectively.
Some interpreters may find themselves reacting rather than responding during an assignment. Reacting is an automatic, instinctive response to a situation, often driven by emotions and without much thought. Responding, however, involves a more deliberate and thoughtful approach, considering the situation and possible outcomes before taking action. Utilising the DC-S for reflection during the assignment allows interpreters to analyse the demands they faced, how they responded, and the implications of their decisions. This ensures that interpreters can respond to demands logically and safely as they occur.
Using the DC-S post-assignment allows you to reflect on the interpreting experience, analyse the demands you faced, how you responded to them, and the effectiveness of your coping strategies. This reflection helps you gain insights into your performance, identify areas for improvement, and develop strategies to enhance your interpreting skills. Additionally, by analysing past assignments using the DC-S framework, you can learn from your experiences, refine your approach to future assignments, and ultimately become a more effective and confident interpreter.
From my personal experience, reflecting after an assignment is my preferred way to utilise the DC-S. It enables me to objectively map out what occurred, which controls I implemented, and their effectiveness. This process helps me add new tools to my toolbox for future assignments, and I can readily apply what I have learned to the next job immediately.
Demands and Controls
Before delving into my experience and application of the DC-S, let’s first summarise the terms “demands” and “controls.”
Demands can be categorised into four main types:
- Environmental Demands:The setting, physical conditions, noise levels, and equipment used during the interpreting assignment.
- Paralinguistic Demands:These demands relate to the speaker’s delivery, including their speed, tone, volume, and other non-verbal aspects of communication.
- Interpersonal Demands:These involve interactions with others during the assignment, such as the behaviour of the speaker, audience, or co-interpreters.
- Intrapersonal Demands:These are the internal demands an interpreter faces, such as managing stress, emotions, self-confidence, and personal coping strategies.
Controls refer to the strategies or actions interpreters use to manage the demands they encounter during interpreting assignments. These controls can be categorised into three main types:
- Pre-Controls:These are strategies implemented before the interpreting assignment begins, such as preparation, setting boundaries, or selecting appropriate assignments.
- During-Controls:These are strategies implemented during the interpreting assignment to manage unexpected demands, such as adjusting interpreting strategies, seeking clarification, or managing stress in real time.
- Post-Controls:These are strategies implemented after the interpreting assignment to reflect on the experience, learn from it, and adjust for future assignments, such as debriefing, seeking feedback, or engaging in self-care activities.
Applying the Demand-Control Schema (DC-S): A Reflective Analysis
During the DC-S workshop, we were asked to share a personal experience and to non-judgmentally analyse it. Here’s the example I shared with my group, keeping confidentiality in mind:
Interpreting assignment*
Setting: Monologue
Topic: Education Pedagogy
Audience: Experts on the topic
Pre-assignment | Demands | Controls Employed |
Familiar setting: terminology and hearing professionals were known | Environmental demand Interpersonal demand | None |
No prep materials provided | Environmental demand | Pre-control: Requested information, none provided |
During the assignment | Demands | Controls Employed |
The hearing professional spoke at a fast pace | Paralinguistic demand | During Control: Requested support from co-interpreter as needed |
Co-interpreter over prompted | Environmental demand | None |
The hearing professionals decided not to use a microphone during their presentation. | Environmental demand | During Control: Requested support from co-interpreter as needed |
An audience member who knew Auslan started prompting in addition to the co-interpreter | Interpersonal demand | None |
Sensory overload, overwhelmed and couldn’t continue interpreting | Intrapersonal demand | During Control: Switched with co-interpreter earlier than agreed time |
I left the room feeling emotional and deflated | Intrapersonal demand | None |
Discussion
At the time of the situation, I left the interpreting assignment feeling like a failure and considered leaving the industry. After breaking down the situation through the lens of DC-S, some important learnings came to light.
Pre-assignment
Pre-assignment: I could not implement additional controls for these demands because I had requested information from my supervisor but needed preparation materials before the assignment. This was not due to any failure on my part; I simply was not set up for success.
During assignment
In monologue settings, interpreters are trained to rely on support from co-interpreters during the assignment. The co-interpreter’s role is to monitor the Target Language (TL) output and provide prompts if information is omitted or distorted from the Source Language (SL). This requires trust between colleagues to decide on appropriate prompt times, agree on signals when the working interpreter requires assistance, and understand that their co- interpreter’s processing time may be slightly longer than they are used to.
Sensory overload occurs when interpreters are exposed to overwhelming stimuli during an interpreting assignment. This can include factors such as fast-paced speech, complex terminology, high levels of background noise, or emotional intensity in the environment. Sensory overload can lead to difficulty concentrating, processing information, and maintaining accuracy in interpretation. It can also result in physical and emotional exhaustion, making it challenging for interpreters to perform their job effectively.
The co-interpreter needed more trust in my Target Language (TL) output. They prompted me to the extent that I felt compelled to shadow them, causing me to be unable to handle the task of shadowing, listening to the speaker, and accurately interpreting the TL simultaneously. Additionally, an audience member, intending to be helpful, also started providing prompts, unaware that the co-interpreter was already over-prompting me.
I missed many opportunities to apply controls to the competing demands. It’s essential to recognise that doing nothing in decision-making during an interpreting assignment is still a form of control because it is a conscious choice. Even though it may seem passive, the decision not to intervene or take action is an active decision that influences the course of the interpretation.
For instance, I could have asked the co-interpreter to stop prompting me and continue listening and interpreting to the best of my ability. When the speaker decided not to use the microphone and roamed the aisle where the audience was, I could have informed them that this would affect my hearing ability and requested that they please use the microphone. Lastly, I could have contacted another colleague to debrief about the situation, accepting help to end the negative feedback loop and move on from the experience.
As a result, I could not continue interpreting and had to switch roles with the co-interpreter, who completed the rest of the assignment. Additionally, I was overwhelmed with a sense of failure, which trapped me in a negative feedback loop, rendering me unable to support the co-interpreter effectively. After the assignment, I had no one to debrief about the situation, which prolonged the negative feedback loop. This situation affected me for many weeks, leading to a significant drop in my self-esteem and confidence in my ability to be a quality interpreter.
Enhancing Interpreting Practice and Building Resilience
Using the DC-S framework to analyse this scenario helped me identify specific areas for improvement in my practice:
Pre-assignment:
- Discuss with the co-interpreter about preferences for prompting and support.
- Develop positive self-talk strategies.
- Implement strategies for effective communication with the co-interpreter throughout the assignment.
- Clarify the interpreter’s role with the speaker.
During assignment:
- Communicate my needs to the co-interpreter.
- Inform the deaf audience of any factors affecting the interpretation (e.g., no sound, speaker coughing, or mumbling).
The DC-S tool helped me identify a secondary trauma. This assignment significantly impacted my self-confidence and ability to work confidently with co-interpreters, affecting all subsequent assignments. Recognising this destructive cycle that low confidence can create and how it ultimately disadvantages the Deaf community in the long term was truly eye-opening.
The DC-S exercise reignited my passion for my work! It gave me a clear direction for personal development and actionable ideas for achieving it, such as seeking mentoring. The DC-S exercise has significantly improved my ability to predict demands in future assignments and expanded my control toolbox. As a result, I now approach assignments more confidently and have a clearer sense of direction in my professional career. The structured discussions have been particularly beneficial in bringing both the negative and positive aspects of my experiences into conscious awareness.
Current practice and application of DC-S Theory
I am now in my 10th year as a CPI Interpreter and have a significantly improved practice due to the DC-S application. I have learned much through engaging quality mentors in the ASLITA Mentoring program for members. Having mentors throughout my 10-year career has been invaluable and has inspired me to become a mentor myself to encourage emerging interpreters.
Collectively, interpreters should apply DC-S theory as a basis for accepting assignments, breaking down demands and controls within the assignment, and extending it into mentoring opportunities to reflect on personal qualities and recognise and improve how we respond to high-stress situations.
“The knowledge base and professional judgment skills needed to function effectively as a sign language interpreter, especially in these complex settings, are not so much taught as they are developed” (Dean and Pollard, Jr, 2001). We all have a role to play in the success and longevity of our profession and in serving as allies to the Deaf community in all settings.
*The scenario used in this blog has been deidentified in accordance with ASLIA Code of Ethics confidentiality tenet
References
Urmc.rochester.edu. (2019). Demand Control Schema – Deaf Wellness Center – University of Rochester Medical Center. [online] Available at: https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/deaf-wellness-center/demand-control-schema.aspx
Dean, R. and Pollard, Jr, R. (2001). Application of Demand-Control Theory to Sign Language Interpreting: Implications for Stress and Interpreter Training. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 6(1), pp.1-14.