Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation, Cognition & Behavior
Vol. 1:1 (2018) ► pp.1–20

Order effects in the translation process

| University of North Carolina at Charlotte
| Minnesota State University Moorhead

This study investigates how the order in which various translation memory match-types occur in a target language version of a text may influence translator behavior and cognition. Empirical research designs often attempt to mitigate for possible confounds from order effects, yet explicit recognition of the time-series nature of data collection can yield a better understanding of the influence that translation technologies have on the translation task. Data are drawn from a previous study that investigated technical, temporal, and cognitive effort in a translation memory environment, and here we analyze the time-series data for potential order effects. Findings show that order effects are present in some instances during the sequential progression through the target text, particularly with respect to technical and cognitive effort. Results are also suggestive of a potential first impression effect.

Keywords: order effects, time series, translation memory, editing behavior, perception of difficulty
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Time series in translation
  • 3.Methods
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Procedures
    • 3.3Measures
    • 3.4Analysis
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Perception of difficulty
    • 5.2First impression effect
    • 5.3Future research
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 2 March 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00001.mel
References
Alves, Fabio
2005 “Ritmo cognitivo, meta-função e experiencia: parámetros de análise processual no desempenho de tradutores novatos e experientes.” In Competência em tradução: cognição e discurso. Edited by F. Alves, C. Magalhães, and A. Pagano, 109–169. Belo Horizonte: Editorial UFMG.Google Scholar
Alves, Fabio, and Daniel Vale
2009 “Probing the Unit of Translation in Time: Aspects of the Design and Development of a Web Application for Storing, Annotating, and Querying Translation Process Data.” Across Languages and Cultures 10 (2): 251–273. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Anderson, Norman H., and Stephen Hubert
1963 “Effects of Concomitant Verbal Recall on Order Effects in Personality Impression Formation.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 2 (5–6): 379–391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angelone, Erik
2012 “The Place of Screen Recording in Process-oriented Translator Training.” Rivista Internazionale di Tecnica della Traduzione (RITT) 141: 41–55.Google Scholar
2013 “Watching and Learning from ‘Virtual Professionals’: Utilizing Screen Recording in Process-oriented Translator Training.” In New Prospects and Perspectives for Educating Language Mediators. Edited by D. Kiraly, S. Hansen-Schirra, and K. Maksymski, 139–155. Tübingen: Günther Narr.Google Scholar
Bansback, Nick, Linda C. Li, Larry Lynd, and Stirling Bryan
2014 “Exploiting Order Effects to Improve the Quality of Decisions.” Patient Education and Counseling 96 (2): 197–203. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker, and Steve Walker
2015 “Fitting Linear Mixed-effects Models Using lme4.” Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1): 1–48. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Bausenhart, Karin M., Oliver Dyjas, and Rolf Ulrich
2015 “Effects of Stimulus Order on Discrimination Sensitivity for Short and Long Durations.” Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 77 (4): 1033–1043. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Brown, Stephen J. and Jerold B. Warner
1985 “Using Daily Stock Returns: The Case of Event Studies.” Journal of Financial Economics 14 (1): 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christensen, Tina Paulsen, and Anne Schjoldager
2015 “Computer-aided Translation Tools: The Uptake and Use by Danish Translation Service Providers.” The Journal of Specialised Translation 251: 89–105.Google Scholar
Cohen, Jacob
1988 Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Denkowski, Michael, and Alan Lavie
2012 “TransCenter: Web-based Translation Research Suite.” AMTA 2012 Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice Demo Session.Google Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara
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. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
2005 “Segmentation in Translation: Differences Across Levels of Expertise and Difficulty.” Target 17 (1): 49–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Computer-aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task.” In Cognition Distributed: How Cognitive Technology Extends our Minds. Edited by I. E. Dror and S. Harnad, 237–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara, and Inge Gorm Hansen
2008 “Comprehension and Production in Translation: A Pilot Study on Segmentation and the Coordination of Reading and Writing Processes.” In Looking at Eyes: Eye-Tracking Studies of Reading and Translation Processing. Edited by S. Göpferich, A. L. Jakobsen, and I. Mees, 9–30. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
Dunne, Keiran J.
2012 “The Industrialization of Translation: Causes, Consequences, and Challenges.” Translation Spaces 11: 143–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “Localization and the (R)Evolution of Translation.” In A Companion to Translation Studies. Edited by S. Bermann and C. Porter, 147–162. Oxford, UK: Wiley Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckes, Thomas
2008 “Rater Types in Writing Performance Assessments: A Classification Approach to Rater Variability.” Language Testing 25 (2): 155–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen
2017 “An Ergonomic Perspective of Translation.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by J. W. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 332–349. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enríquez Raído, Vanessa
2014 Translation and Web Searching. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel
2016 “Experimental Research.” In Researching Translation and Interpreting. Edited by C. V. Angelelli and B. J. Baer, 220–228. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Guerberof Arenas, Ana
2009 “Productivity and Quality in the Post-editing of Outputs from Translation Memories and Machine Translation.” Localisation Focus 7 (1): 11–21.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, Kristian
2017 “Eye Tracking in Translation Process Research.” In The Handbook of Translation and Cognition. Edited by J. W. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 248–264. Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke
1999 “Logging Target Text Production with Translong.” In Probing the Process in Translation: Methods and Results. Edited by G. e Hansen, 9–20. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
2002 “Translation Drafting by Professional Translators and by Translation Students.” In Empirical Translation Studies: Process and Product. Edited by Gyde Hansen, 191–204. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
2011 “Tracking Translators’ Keystrokes and Eye Movements with Translog.” In Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches to Translation Studies. Edited by C. Alvstad, A. Hild, and E. Tiselius, 37–55. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt Lykke, and Kristian T. H. Jensen
2008 “Eye Movement Behavior Across Four Different Types of Reading Task.” Copenhagen Studies in Language 361: 103–124.Google Scholar
Jensen, Kristian T. H.
2011 “Distribution of Attention Between Source Text and Target Text during Translation.” In Cognitive Explorations of Translation. Edited by S. O’Brien, 215–237. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Killman, Jeffrey
2015 “Context as Achilles’ Heel of Translation Technologies: Major Implications for End-users.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 10 (2): 203–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krings, Hans P.
2001 Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of Machine Translation Post-editing Processes. Edited by G. S. Koby. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.Google Scholar
Kumpulainen, Minna
2015 “On the Operationalization of ‘Pauses’ in Translation Process Research.” Translation & Interpreting 7 (1): 47–58.Google Scholar
Lacruz, Isabel, Gregory M. Shreve, and Erik Angelone
2012 “Average Pause Ratio as an Indicator of Cognitive Effort in Post-editing: A Case Study.” Proceedings of the AMTA 2012 Workshop on Post-editing Technology and Practice. San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
LeBlanc, Matthieu
2013 “Translators on Translation Memory (TM): Results of an Ethnographic Study in Three Translation Services and Agencies.” Translation & Interpreting 5 (2): 1–13.Google Scholar
Lindgaard, Gitte, Gary Fernandes, Cathy Dudek, and Judith M. Brown
2006 “Attention Web Designers: You Have 50 Milliseconds to Make a Good First Impression!” Behaviour & Information Technology 25 (2): 115–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D.
2014 Computer-Assisted Translation: An Empirical Investigation of Cognitive Effort. Ph.D. dissertation, Kent State University, OH. Available at [URL]
2015 “On the Applicability of Internet-Mediated Research Methods to Investigate Translators’ Cognitive Behavior.” Translation & Interpreting 7 (1): 59–71.Google Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D., and Gregory M. Shreve
2016 “Match Evaluation and Over-editing in a Translation Memory Environment.” In Reembedding Translation Process Research. Edited by R. Muñoz, 131–148. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson
2017 Quantitative Research Methods in Translation and Interpreting Studies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Michels, Walter C., and Harry Helson
1954 “A Quantitative Theory of Time-order Effects.” The American Journal of Psychology 67 (2): 327–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon
2006 “Pauses as Indicators of Cognitive Effort in Post-editing Machine Translation Output.” Across Language and Cultures 7 (1): 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007 “Eye-tracking and Translation Memory Matches.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 14 (3): 185–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pym, Anthony
2011 “What Technology Does to Translating.” Translation & Interpreting 3 (1): 1–9.Google Scholar
R Core Team
2016 R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. [URL].
Ruokonen, Minna, and Kaisa Koskinen
2017 “Dancing with Technology: Translators’ Narratives on the Dance of Human and Machinic Agency in Translation Work.” The Translator 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saldanha, Gabriela, and Sharon O’Brien
2013 Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schilperoord, Joost
1996 It’s about Time: Temporal Aspects of Cognitive Processes in Text Production. Utrecht: USI &C.Google Scholar
Shreve, Gregory M., Christina Schäffner, Joseph H. Danks, and Jennifer Griffin
1993 “Is There a Special Kind of ‘Reading’ for Translation? An Empirical Investigation of Reading in the Translation Process.” Target 5 (1): 21–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weigle, Sara Cushing
1994 “Effects of Training on Raters of ESL Compositions.” Language Testing 11 (2): 171–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whyatt, Bogusława, Katarzyna Stachowiak, and Marta Kajzer-Wietrzny
2016 “Similar and Different: Cognitive Rhythm and Effort in Translation and Paraphasing.” Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 52 (2): 175–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Mellinger, Christopher D.
2023. Chapter 8. Embedding, extending, and distributing interpreter cognition with technology. In Interpreting Technologies – Current and Future Trends [IVITRA Research in Linguistics and Literature, 37], ► pp. 195 ff. DOI logo
Whyatt, Bogusława
2022. In search of directionality effectsin the translation processand in the end product. Translation, Cognition & Behavior ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Whyatt, Bogusława, Olga Witczak & Ewa Tomczak
2021. Information behaviour in bidirectional translators: focus on online resources. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 15:2 ► pp. 154 ff. DOI logo
Zhou, Xiangyan, Xiangling Wang & Xiaodong Liu
2022. The impact of task complexity and translating self-efficacy belief on students’ translation performance: Evidence from process and product data. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.