Cross-lingual Qualitative Research: 3 Things to Keep in Mind

Hello Qualitative Mind,

I know I might sound like a broken record by saying this [again] but here it goes...most of the content ideas I develop for the blog come from projects, students and you (the Quali Q community), and I’m really grateful for that because it makes my work more exciting and real. If you ever wondered why I asked three questions when someone requested to enter the now archivede Quali Q for Qualitative Minds Private Facebook Group, now you know. I ask them to gather ideas, content inspiration, and, most importantly, to get to know you better.

Let’s dive right into today’s topic: cross-lingual qualitative research. This topic is near and dear to me because I wrote and published about it during my PhD: Different Approaches to Cross-lingual Focus Groups: Lessons From a Community-Based Participatory Research Project in the ENRICH Study. The paper was about conducting focus groups in languages that the researchers were not fluent in with the help of an interpreter or a moderator. An interpreter is defined as someone who translates back and forth between individuals, whereas a translator works with recorded material translating from one language to another. If you are conducting cross-lingual qualitative research, especially focus groups, I highly recommend that you read the paper and some of its key references too.

If you are conducting cross-lingual qualitative research, especially focus groups, I highly recommend that you read the paper and some of its key references too.

Now moving to my current work. I’m planning to conduct interviews with French Canadian women -in French- as part of a consulting project. Seven years ago I’d have felt at ease with conducting the interviews without an interpreter because I was more fluent in French but now I’m not! My French is rather rusty and, while I would understand most of their answers, I’d likely have a hard time formulating my follow-up questions or get too worried about them instead of active listening to participants. That’s is the reason why I’m looking for an interpreter who is familiar with qualitative research and fluent in French and English.

When the Principal Investigators for the study shared that there would be a few interviews in French, I started thinking about my past experience conducting cross-lingual focus groups and what key things I needed to keep in mind for the current study. The three main considerations I’m transferring to my present work are the following:

1. Relationship & trust with the interpreter. I’m looking for a bilingual interpreter who is familiar with qualitative research, and willing to engage in the project in a genuine manner. I want the interpreter to understand Quali Q’s vision and mission, and feel comfortable working with me and the company. I truly believe that we, as researchers, need to show we care before asking people to share their stories with us and, in this case, it’s not enough for me to do that. I need the interpreter to believe in that principle as well, and act accordingly. Even though I’ll be able to understand women’s responses to some degree, I expect the interpreter to guide me when I miss important aspects of women’s answers that might require further probing. In other words, there is a level of trust I want to build with the interpreter before we jump on Zoom for online interviews.

2. Control: the catch and release tale. By choosing to use real-time interpretation vs. a moderator to conduct the whole interview in French with translation of the recorded material after the interviews, I’m trying to retain control over the interview. I want to formulate follow-up questions, probe in directions that might not be laid out in the interview guide, and engage with the participants. I’ll not be sitting in the interviews as an observer, I’ll have an active role. With that being said, consideration #1 emphasized how I want to trust the interpreter to an extent that I’d let go of that control when they instruct me to follow-up and explore different areas. Thus, the catch and release of control.

3. Data analysis plan. In my opinion (which is based on readings about language, culture and meaning), engaging a moderator who translates recorded material requires acknowledging the fact that the person translating from one language to another is also transferring sociocultural and political values carried through words. As such, the data analysis will start in the process of translation as the translator assigns certain meaning to words in another language. This is not the path I’m following with my current project by engaging an interpreter. Yet, I firmly believe the interpreter will still shape the data as they formulate my follow-up questions to participants and/or guide me throughout the interview. Because of that, I want to involve the interpreter in data analysis, if possible, as someone who would be going through transcripts and coding the data. However, if, for whatever reason, that is not an option the minimum involvement I’m comfortable with includes having the interpreter review the coding scheme, including final list of codes, categories and identified themes. This is what we did for my PhD research and although it wasn’t perfect, it was a valid process that made me confident in the validity of the data, as well as how it represented participants.

Wow! I just gave you a good insight into what is going through my qualitative mind as I prepare for another exciting Quali Q project. If you are doing cross-lingual qualitative research, let us know and share your thoughts and experiences with our community. I sincerely hope you found the information here useful enough to apply it to your own cross-lingual qualitative research.

Talk soon,
Maira Quintanilha