Home Linguistics & Semiotics 15. Research ethics, interpreters and biomedical research
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

15. Research ethics, interpreters and biomedical research

  • Patricia Kaufert , Joseph M. Kaufert and Lisa LaBine
View more publications by John Benjamins Publishing Company
To Publisher Page
The Critical Link 5
This chapter is in the book The Critical Link 5

Abstract

This paper is based on a project with the title Centering the Human Subject in Health Research: The Meaning and Experience of Research Participation. This paper looks at research interpreters and research workers who are influenced by both professional and ethical codes and broader research policies which govern the ethical conduct of clinical and community-based research. It is based on a review of the research ethics literature and a series of semi-structured in-depth interviews with fourteen key informants including researchers, interpreters and members of Research Ethics Boards (REBs). These interviews were completed with individuals with direct experience working across language barriers, sometimes as interpreters and sometimes as researchers; it is these interviews that provide the framework for this paper. It asks two main questions: (1) What are the differences and similarities between interpreters working in research and medical interpreters; and (2) How do the codes and policies governing research ethics compare with the professional codes of ethical conduct applied to interpreters. To answer the first question we revisit the three models of the medical interpreter: the interpreter as conduit, the interpreter as cultural broker, and the community embedded interpreter (Avery, 2001). We provide a brief description of each model and discuss the roles of interpreters, focusing on language and relationships. We also examine the implications of language barriers for research ethics, focusing on informed consent and the technical and ethical challenges of translating consent forms from one language to another. We then compare the professional codes of ethical conduct developed for medical interpreters by their own profession with the rules and regulations issued by government policy and research funding agencies and implemented by Research Ethics Boards. Lastly, we look at the question of community consent and at the roles played by some interpreters in speaking “for” a researcher and a research project.

Abstract

This paper is based on a project with the title Centering the Human Subject in Health Research: The Meaning and Experience of Research Participation. This paper looks at research interpreters and research workers who are influenced by both professional and ethical codes and broader research policies which govern the ethical conduct of clinical and community-based research. It is based on a review of the research ethics literature and a series of semi-structured in-depth interviews with fourteen key informants including researchers, interpreters and members of Research Ethics Boards (REBs). These interviews were completed with individuals with direct experience working across language barriers, sometimes as interpreters and sometimes as researchers; it is these interviews that provide the framework for this paper. It asks two main questions: (1) What are the differences and similarities between interpreters working in research and medical interpreters; and (2) How do the codes and policies governing research ethics compare with the professional codes of ethical conduct applied to interpreters. To answer the first question we revisit the three models of the medical interpreter: the interpreter as conduit, the interpreter as cultural broker, and the community embedded interpreter (Avery, 2001). We provide a brief description of each model and discuss the roles of interpreters, focusing on language and relationships. We also examine the implications of language barriers for research ethics, focusing on informed consent and the technical and ethical challenges of translating consent forms from one language to another. We then compare the professional codes of ethical conduct developed for medical interpreters by their own profession with the rules and regulations issued by government policy and research funding agencies and implemented by Research Ethics Boards. Lastly, we look at the question of community consent and at the roles played by some interpreters in speaking “for” a researcher and a research project.

Chapters in this book

  1. Prelim pages i
  2. Table of contents v
  3. Acknowledgements vii
  4. 1. Introduction. Quality in interpreting 1
  5. Part I. A shared responsibility
  6. 2. Forensic interpreting 13
  7. 3. The tension between adequacy and acceptability in legal interpreting and translation 37
  8. 4. A discourse of danger and loss 55
  9. 5. Is healthcare interpreter policy left in the seventies? 71
  10. Part II. Investigations and innovations in quality interpreting
  11. 6. Interpreter ethics versus customary law 85
  12. 7. A shared responsibility in the administration of justice 99
  13. 8. Interpreting for the record 119
  14. 9. Court interpreting in Basque 135
  15. 10. Community interpreting in Spain 149
  16. Part III. Pedagogy, ethics and responsibility in interpreting
  17. 11. Toward more reliable assessment of interpreting performance 171
  18. 12. Quality in healthcare interpreter training 187
  19. 13. What can interpreters learn from discourse studies? 201
  20. 14. Achieving quality in health care interpreting 221
  21. 15. Research ethics, interpreters and biomedical research 235
  22. Contributors 251
  23. Index 253
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.87.18kau

Chapters in this book

  1. Prelim pages i
  2. Table of contents v
  3. Acknowledgements vii
  4. 1. Introduction. Quality in interpreting 1
  5. Part I. A shared responsibility
  6. 2. Forensic interpreting 13
  7. 3. The tension between adequacy and acceptability in legal interpreting and translation 37
  8. 4. A discourse of danger and loss 55
  9. 5. Is healthcare interpreter policy left in the seventies? 71
  10. Part II. Investigations and innovations in quality interpreting
  11. 6. Interpreter ethics versus customary law 85
  12. 7. A shared responsibility in the administration of justice 99
  13. 8. Interpreting for the record 119
  14. 9. Court interpreting in Basque 135
  15. 10. Community interpreting in Spain 149
  16. Part III. Pedagogy, ethics and responsibility in interpreting
  17. 11. Toward more reliable assessment of interpreting performance 171
  18. 12. Quality in healthcare interpreter training 187
  19. 13. What can interpreters learn from discourse studies? 201
  20. 14. Achieving quality in health care interpreting 221
  21. 15. Research ethics, interpreters and biomedical research 235
  22. Contributors 251
  23. Index 253
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 29.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/btl.87.18kau/html
Scroll to top button