Cover not available
Part of
Research Methods in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies
Edited by Ana María Rojo López and Ricardo Muñoz Martín
[Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 10] 2025
► pp. 158–183

Chapter 7
Keylogging

 | University of Bologna
 | Beijing Foreign Studies University
 | University of Bologna
 | University of Bologna
Keystroke logging, or keylogging, is a powerful research method for collecting unobtrusive, fine-grained data on text production processes. In cognitive translation and interpreting studies (CTIS), keyloggers like Translog-II and Inputlog capture the dynamics of translation behavior, including pauses, revisions, information searching, and typing patterns, which enrich language data and timestamp it, down to the millisecond. Keylogging data enables researchers to infer underlying cognitive processes, compare translator expertise levels, and assess task difficulty. This chapter provides an overview of keylogging research in CTIS, covering its conceptual basis, key variables, ethical considerations, analytical methods, and limitations. It emphasizes the need for ecological validity, standardized metrics, and thorough reporting in keylogging studies. Future applications may expand to multimodal translation, collaborative workflows, and integration with sensor technologies.
Article outline
  • 1.The method, and key concepts
    • 1.1The state of the art in keylogging in CTIS
    • 1.2Ethical issues in keylogging studies
  • 2.Conceptual aspects
    • 2.1Variables in keylogging
    • 2.2Measurement and operationalization in keylogging
  • 3.Implementation
    • 3.1Research designs in keylogging
    • 3.2Current popular CTIS research keyloggers
  • 4.Closing remarks
    • 4.1Challenges: How many participants are enough?
    • 4.2Advantages and disadvantages of keylogging
  • Notes
  • Further readings on keylogging
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (104)
Further readings on keylogging
Feit, A. M., Weir, D., & Oulasvirta, A. (2016). How we type: Movement strategies and performance in everyday typing. In CHI’16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 4262–4273). ACM. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindgren, E., & Sullivan, K. (Eds.). (2019). Observing writing: Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting. Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manchón Ruiz, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (Eds.). (2023). Research methods in the study of L2 writing processes. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shadman, R., Wahab, A. A., Manno, M., Lukaszewski, M., Hou, D., & Hussain, F. (2023). Keystroke dynamics: Concepts, techniques, and applications. arXiv. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhu, M., Zhang, M., & Deane, P. (2019). Analysis of keystroke sequences in writing logs. ETS Research Report Series, 2019(1), 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
References
Ahlsén, E., & Strömqvist, S. (1999). ScriptLog: A tool for logging the writing process and its possible diagnostic use. In F. Loncke, J. Clibbens, H. Arvidson, & L. Lloyd (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication. New directions in research and practice (pp. 144–149). Wiley.Google Scholar
Allen, L. K., Jacovina, M. E., Dascalu, M., Roscoe, R. D., Kent, K. M., Likens, A. D., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). {ENTER} ing the Time Series {SPACE}: Uncovering the writing process through keystroke analyses. In T. Barnes, M. Chi, & M. Feng (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 22–29). Raleigh, NC. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]Google Scholar
Alves, F., & Couto Vale, D. (2017). On drafting and revision in translation: A corpus linguistics oriented analysis of translation process data. In S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, & O. Čulo (Eds.), Annotation, exploitation and evaluation of parallel corpora. TC3 I (pp. 81–101). Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Alves, F., & Gonçalves, J. L. (2003). A relevance theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in translation. In F. Alves (Ed.), Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process oriented research (pp. 3–24). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alves, F., Pagano, A. S., Neumann, S., Steiner, E., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2010). Translation units and grammatical shifts: Towards an integration of product- and process-based translation research. In G. M. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation and cognition (pp. 109–142). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alves, R. A., Castro, S. L., Sousa, L., & Strömqvist, S. (2007). Typing skill and pause–execution cycles in written composition. In M. Torrance, L. Van Waes, & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp. 55–65). Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baaijen, V. M., Galbraith, D., & de Glopper, K. (2012). Keystroke analysis: Reflections on procedures and measures. Written Communication, 29(3), 246–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balling, L. W., & Hvelplund, K. T. (2015). Design and statistics in quantitative translation (process) research. Translation Spaces, 4(1), 169–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bridwell, L., Sirc, G., Brooke, R. (1985). Revising and computing: Case studies of student writers. In S. Freedman (Ed.,) The acquisition of written language (pp. 172–195). Ablex.Google Scholar
Calatrava Martínez, M., De Irala Estévez, J., Osorio de Rebellón, A., Benítez Sastoque, E. R., & Lopez del Burgo, C. (2022). Matched and fully private? A new self-generated identification code for school-based cohort studies to increase perceived anonymity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 82(3), 465–481. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carl, M. (2012a). Translog-II: A program for recording user activity data for empirical translation process research. Paper presented at the 8th international conference on language resources and evaluation, LREC 2012, Istanbul, Turkey.Google Scholar
(2012b). The CRITT TPR-DB 1.0: A database for empirical human translation process research. In S. O’Brien, M. Simard, & L. Specia (Eds.), Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice, San Diego, CA. AMTA. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]Google Scholar
Carl, M., Bangalore, S. & Schaeffer, M. (2016). Introduction and overview. In M. Carl, S. Bangalore, & M. Schaeffer (Eds.), New directions in empirical translation process research (pp. 3–12). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2001). Fluency in writing. Written Communication, 18(1), 80–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2014). Pauses in spontaneous written communication: A keystroke logging study. Journal of Writing Research, 6(1), 61–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conijn, R., Cook, C., Van Zaanen, M., & Van Waes, L. (2022). Early prediction of writing quality using keystroke logging. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32(4), 835–866. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conijn, R., Roeser, J., & van Zaanen, M. (2019). Understanding the keystroke log: The effect of writing task on keystroke features. Reading and Writing, 32(9), 2353–2374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cuschieri, S., Grech, V., & Savona Ventura, C. (2018). WASP (Write a Scientific Paper): How to write a scientific thesis. Early Human Development, 127, 101–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dhakal, V., Feit, A. M., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2018). Observations on typing from 136 million keystrokes. In CHI’18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–12). ACM. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dragsted, B. (2004). Segmentation in translation and translation memory systems. An empirical investigation of cognitive segmentation and effects of integrating a TM system into the translation process. Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Dragsted, B., & Carl, M. (2013). Towards a classification of translation styles based on eye-tracking and key-logging data. Journal of Writing Research, 5(1), 133–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Du, Z. (2024). Bridging the gap. Exploring the cognitive impact of InterpretBank on Chinese interpreting trainees (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Bologna.Google Scholar
Duin, A. H., & Bridwell, L. S. (1985). Looking in-depth at writers: Computers as writing medium and research tool. In J. L. Collins & E. A. Sommers (Eds.), Writing on-line: Using computers in the teaching of writing (pp. 115–121). Boynton/Cook.Google Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Massey, G. (2014). Cognitive ergonomic issues in professional translation. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The development of translation competence: Theories and methodologies from psycholinguistics and cognitive science (pp. 58–86). Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Enríquez Raído, V. & Cai, Y. (2023). Changes in web search query behavior of English-to-Chinese translation trainees. Ampersand, 11, 100137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (rev. ed.). The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Galbraith, D., & Baaijen, V. M. (2019). Aligning keystrokes with cognitive processes in writing. In E. Lindgren & K. Sullivan (Eds.) Observing writing. Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting (pp. 306–325). Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gergle, D., & Tan, D. S. (2014). Experimental research in HCI. In J. S. Olson & W. A. Kellogg (Eds.), Ways of knowing in HCI (pp. 191–227). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grabowski, J. (2008). The internal structure of university students’ keyboard skills. Journal of Writing Research, 1(1), 27–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heilmann, A., & Neumann, S. (2016). Dynamic pause assessment of keystroke logged data for the detection of complexity in translation and monolingual text production. In D. Brunato, F. Dell’Orletta, G. Venturi, T. François, & P. Blache (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Linguistic Complexity (pp. 98–103). ACL. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]Google Scholar
Hvelplund, K. T. (2011). Allocation of cognitive resources in translation: An eye-tracking and key-logging stud. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Copenhagen Business School.Google Scholar
(2011). Unravelling the processing units of translation. Across Languages and Cultures, 12(2), 235–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Immonen, S., & Mäkisalo, J. (2010). Pauses reflecting the processing of syntactic units in monolingual text production and translation. Hermes, 23(44), 45–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobsen, A. L. (2003). Effects of think aloud on translation speed, revision, and segmentation. In Triangulating translation (pp. 69–95). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Segmentation in translation: A look at expert behaviour. In D. Li, V. L. C. Lei, & Y. He (Eds.), Researching cognitive processes of translation (pp. 71–108). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobsen, A. L., & Schou, L. 1999. Translog documentation, Version 1.0. In G. Hansen (Ed.) Probing the process in translation: Methods and results (pp. 151–186). Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Jankowska, A. (2021). Audio describing films: A first look into the description process. JoSTrans, 36, 26–52. [URL]Google Scholar
Jia, Y., & Sun, S. (2023). Man or machine? Comparing the difficulty of human translation versus neural machine translation post-editing. Perspectives, 31(5), 950–968. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katerina, T., & Nicolaos, P. (2018). Mouse behavioral patterns and keystroke dynamics in End-User Development: What can they tell us about users’ behavioral attributes? Computers in Human Behavior, 83, 288–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kruger, H. (2016). What’s happening when nothing’s happening? Combining eyetracking and keylogging to explore cognitive processing during pauses in translation production. Across Languages and Cultures, 17(1), 25–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kumpulainen, M. (2015). On the operationalisation of ‘pauses’ in translation process research. Translation & Interpreting, 7(1), 47–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lacruz, I., Shreve, G. M., & Angelone, E. 2012. Average pause ratio as an indicator of cognitive effort in post-editing: A case study. In S. O’Brien, M. Simard, & L. Specia (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Post-editing Technology and Practice. San Diego, CA. AMTA. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]Google Scholar
Lam, K., Meijer, K., Loonstra, F., Coerver, E., Twose, J., Redeman, E., Moraal, B., Barkhof, F., de Groot, V., Uitdehaag, B., & Killestein, J. (2021). Real-world keystroke dynamics are a potentially valid biomarker for clinical disability in multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 27(9), 1421–1431. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehka-Paul, O. (2020). Behavioural indicators of translators’ decisional styles in a translation task: A longitudinal study. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting 6(1), 81–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2013). Keystroke logging in writing research: Using Inputlog to analyze and visualize writing processes. Written Communication, 30(3), 358–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leijten, M., Van Waes, L., & Van Horenbeeck, E. (2015). Analyzing writing process data: A linguistic perspective. In G. Cislaru (Ed.), Writing(s) at the crossroads (pp. 277–302). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leppich, D., Bieber, C., Proschek, K., Harms, P., & Schubert, U. (2023). DUX: A dataset of user interactions and user emotions. I-Com, 22(2), 101–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manchón Ruiz, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (2023). The study of L2 writing processes: Lines and methods of inquiry. In R. M. Manchón Ruiz & J. Roca de Larios (Eds.). Research methods in the study of L2 writing processes (pp. 6–31). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellinger, C. D. (2023). Embedding, extending, and distributing interpreter cognition with technology. In G. Corpas Pastor & B. Defrancq (Eds.), Interpreting technologies — Current and future trends (pp. 195–216). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellinger, C., & Hanson, T. (2016). Quantitative research methods in translation and interpreting studies. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo. (2021). Situated cognition. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies (Vol. 5, pp. 207–212). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, R., & Apfelthaler, M. (2022). A task segment framework to study keylogged translation processes. Translation & Interpreting, 14(2), 8–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, R., & Cardona Guerra, J. M. (2019). Translating in fits and starts: Pause thresholds and roles in the research of translation processes. Perspectives, 27(4), 525–551. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz Martín, R., & Martín de León, C. (2018). Fascinatin’ rhythm — And pauses in translators’ cognitive processes. Hermes, 57, 29–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nitzke, J., & Gros, A. K. (2021) Preferential changes in revision and post-editing. In M. Koponen, B. Mossop, I. Robert, & G. Scocchera (Eds.), Translation revision and post-editing: Industry practices and cognitive processes (pp. 21–34). Routledge.Google Scholar
O’Brien, S. (2006). Pauses as indicators of cognitive effort in post-editing machine translation output. Across Languages and Cultures, 7(1), 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olalla Soler, C. (2023). Literal vs. default translation. Challenging the constructs with middle Egyptian translation as an extreme case in point. Sendebar, 34, 65–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oliveira, E. A., Conijn, R., De Barba, P., & Tresize, K. (2020). Writing analytics across essay tasks with different cognitive load demands. Paper presented at ASCILITE 2020. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Orrego Carmona, D., Dutka, L., & Szarkowska, A. (2018). Using translation process research to explore the creation of subtitles: An eye-tracking study comparing professional and trainee subtitlers. JoSTrans, 30, 150–180. [URL]Google Scholar
Pinet, S., Dubarry, A.-S., & Alario, F.-X. (2016). Response retrieval and motor planning during typing. Brain and Language, 159, 74–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Puerini, S. (2023). Text-production tasks at the keyboard. Linguistic and behavioral contrasts. Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 6(1), 29–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, H. (2017). Ethnographies of translation and situated cognition. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The handbook of translation and cognition (pp. 290–310). John Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, H., & Rogl, R. (2021). Translation and situated, embodied, distributed, embedded and extended cognition. In F. Alves & A. L. Jakobsen (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of translation and cognition (pp. 478–499). Routledge.Google Scholar
Rojo López, A., Cifuentes Férez, P., & Ramos Caro, M. (2021). The role of creativity on the translation of motion verbs: Data on the translation product and process. Onomázein, 52, 99–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenqvist, S. (2015). Developing pause thresholds for keystroke logging analysis (Unpublished BA thesis). University of Umea.Google Scholar
Sala-Bubaré, A., Castelló, M., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2021). Writing processes as situated regulation processes: A context-based approach to doctoral writing. Journal of Writing Research 13(1), 299–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, M., Tardel, A., Hofmann, S., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2019). Cognitive effort and efficiency in translation revision. In E. Huertas Barros, S. Vandepitte, & E. Iglesias Fernández (Eds.), Quality assurance and assessment practices in translation and interpreting (pp. 226–243). IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schilperoord, J. (1996). The distribution of pause time in written text production. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzjin (Eds.), Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 21–35). Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
(2001). On the cognitive status of pauses in discourse production. In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Contemporary tools and techniques for studying writing (pp. 61–90). Kluwer.Google Scholar
Schou, L, Dragsted, B., & Carl, M. 2009. Ten years of Translog. In I. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Göpferich (Eds), Methodology, technology and innovation in translation process research (pp. 37–48). Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Schrijver, I., Van Vaerenbergh, L., Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2016). The impact of writing training on transediting in translation, analyzed from a product and process perspective. Perspectives, 24(2), 218–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schrijver, I., Van Vaerenbergh, L., & Van Waes, L. (2012). An exploratory study of transediting in students’ translation processes. Hermes, 25(49), 99–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Serbina, T., Hintzen, S., Niemietz, P., & Neumann, S. (2017). Changes of word class during translation — Insights from a combined analysis of corpus, keystroke logging and eye-tracking data. In S. Hansen-Schirra, O. Czulo, & S. Hofmann (Eds.), Empirical modelling of translation and interpreting (pp. 177–208). Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Serbina, T., Niemietz, P., Fricke, M., Meisen, P. & Neumann. S. (2015). Part of speech annotation of intermediate versions in the keystroke logged translation corpus. In A. Meyers, I. Rehbein, & H. Zinsmeister (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th Linguistic Annotation Workshop (pp. 102–111). Denver, CO. ACL. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Severinson Eklundh K. S., & Kollberg P. (1992). Translating keystroke records into a general notation for the writing process. Department of Numerical Analysis and Computing Science, Royal Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Shadman, R., Anu Wahab, A., Manno, M., Lukaszewski, M., Hou, D., & Hussain, F. (2023). Keystroke dynamics: Concepts, techniques, and applications. arXiv e-prints. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shi, Y., Wang, X., Zheng, K., & Cao, S. (2023). User authentication method based on keystroke dynamics and mouse dynamics using HDA. Multimedia Systems, 29(2), 653–668. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sjørup, A. C. (2013). Cognitive effort in metaphor translation: An eye-tracking and key-logging study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Copenhagen Business School. [URL]Google Scholar
Song, D. X., Wagner, D., & Tian, X. (2001). Timing analysis of keystrokes and timing attacks on SSH. In Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Security Symposium. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Strömqvist, S., & Karlsson, H. (2002). ScriptLog for Windows: User’s manual (technical report). Lund University and University College of Stavanger.Google Scholar
Sun, S., Li, T., & Zhou, X. (2020). Effects of thinking aloud on cognitive effort in translation. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series–Themes in Translation Studies, 19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teixeira, C. S. C., Moorkens, J., Turner, D., Vreeke, J., & Way, A. (2019). Creating a multimodal translation tool and testing machine translation integration using touch and voice. Human Brain Mapping, 45(2), Article e26617. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, P. A., & Preetha Mathew, K. (2023). A broad review on non-intrusive active user authentication in biometrics. Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing, 14(1), 339–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsimperidis, I., & Arampatzis, A. (2020). The keyboard knows about you: Revealing user characteristics via keystroke dynamics. International Journal of Technoethics 11(2), 34–51. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Usoof, H., Leblay, C., & Caporossi, G. (2020). GenoGraphiX-Log version 2.0 user guide. Technical report. Les Cahiers du GERAD, G–2020–68. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]Google Scholar
Van Waes, L., & Leijten, M. (2015). Fluency in writing: A multidimensional perspective on writing fluency applied to L1 and L2. Computers and Composition, 38, 79–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Waes, L., Leijten, M., Pauwaert, T., & Van Horenbeeck, E. (2019). A multilingual copy task: Measuring typing and motor skills in writing with Inputlog. Journal of Open Research Software, 7(1:30), 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Waes, L., Leijten, M., Roeser, J., Olive, T., & Grabowski, J. (2021). Measuring and assessing typing skills in writing research. Journal of Writing Research, 13(1), 107–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vieira, L. Nunes. (2017). How do measures of cognitive effort relate to each other? A multivariate analysis of post-editing process data. Machine Translation, 30(1), 41–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, L., & Sun, S. (2023). Dictating translations with automatic speech recognition: Effects on translators’ performance. Frontiers in Psychology 14, 1108898. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wengelin, Å., Frid, J., Johansson, R., & Johansson, V. (2019). Combining keystroke logging with other methods: Towards an experimental environment for writing process research. In E. Lindgren & K. Sullivan (Eds.), Observing writing (pp. 30–49). Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whyatt, B. (2018). Testing indicators of translation expertise in an intralingual task. Hermes, 57, 63–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xiao, K., & Muñoz Martín, R. (2020). Cognitive translation studies: Models and methods at the cutting edge. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 19, 1–24.Google Scholar
Yamada, M., T. Mizowaki, L. Zou, & M. Carl. (2022). Trados-to-Translog-II: Adding gaze and qualitivity data to the CRITT TPR-DB. In Proceedings of the 23rd annual Conference of the EMTA (pp. 295–296). EAMT. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]Google Scholar
Yurek, L. A., Vasey, J., & Sullivan Havens, D. (2008). The use of self-generated identification codes in longitudinal research. Evaluation Review, 32(5), 435–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, H., & Torres Hostench, O. (2022). Training in machine translation post-editing for foreign language students. Language Learning & Technology, 26(1), 1–17. [URL]Google Scholar
Zulueta, J., Demos, A. P., Vesel, C., Ross, M., Piscitello, A., Hussain, F., Langenecker, S. A., McInnis, M., Nelson, P., Ryan, K., Leow, A., & Ajilore, O. (2021). The effects of bipolar disorder risk on a mobile phone keystroke dynamics based biomarker of brain age. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar