• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

information for practice

news, new scholarship & more from around the world


advanced search
  • gary.holden@nyu.edu
  • @ Info4Practice
  • Archive
  • About
  • Help
  • Browse Key Journals
  • RSS Feeds

Secondary Traumatic Stress of Interpreters Working in Psychotherapy: Protective, Risk and Interpreter‐Specific Factors

ABSTRACT

Background

Interpreters working in psychotherapy are frequently exposed to emotionally demanding situations and may develop secondary traumatic stress. However, quantitative research has largely focused on community interpreters, highlighting the need for data on symptom levels and associated risk factors among interpreters in psychotherapeutic settings.

Methods

Sixty-three eligible interpreters were included. Secondary traumatization, psychological distress, resources, competence, occupational distress, empathy, as well as interpreter-specific aspects such as flight experience and identification with the patient’s cultural background were assessed using validated instruments. Data were analyzed using correlations and hierarchical multiple regression to examine general and interpreter-specific risk factors.

Results

14.29% of participants scored above the clinical cutoff for secondary traumatic stress. In a hierarchical regression model predicting secondary traumatic stress (STS), the final model explained a substantial proportion of variance (adjusted R
2 = 0.52). In Step 3, interpreter-specific factors contributed significantly to the model (ΔR
2 = 0.25, F_change (2,48) = 14.10, p < 0.001), with flight experience showing a significant negative association with STS (β = −0.54, 95% CI [−0.97, −0.16]) and identification with the patient’s cultural background showing a significant positive association (β = 0.27, 95% CI [0.05, 0.47]).

Conclusion

Interpreters with personal flight experience and strong identification with the client’s cultural background appear particularly vulnerable to secondary traumatic stress. Psychological distress, resources, competence, occupational distress, and empathy did not influence secondary traumatic stress. This suggests that support such as supervision and training should focus more specifically on interpreters’ personal experiences and cultural match.

Read the full article ›

Posted in: Journal Article Abstracts on 08/14/2026 | Link to this post on IFP |
Share

Primary Sidebar

Categories

Category RSS Feeds

  • Calls & Consultations
  • Clinical Trials
  • Funding
  • Grey Literature
  • Guidelines Plus
  • History
  • Infographics
  • Journal Article Abstracts
  • Meta-analyses - Systematic Reviews
  • Monographs & Edited Collections
  • News
  • Open Access Journal Articles
  • Podcasts
  • Video

© 1993-2026 Dr. Gary Holden. All rights reserved.

gary.holden@nyu.edu
@Info4Practice