Metacognitive self-perception in interpreting
The ability of interpreters to engage in metacognitive activity
enabling them to self-assess the changing purpose of their task and subsequent
strategies can play a pivotal role in their global attainment levels. This paper argues that developing a high degree of metacognition can be key,
not only for the expert’s interpreting performance, but also for trainees’
learning processes, helping them develop a more accurate professional
self-concept and better self-regulation techniques. The study, carried
out with 199 interpreting trainees, tested a tool to assess
self-perceived metacognition levels. The measurement tool was developed on the
basis of previous relevant academic contributions to the overlapping fields of
Education, Interpreting and Psychology. According to the results of a factor
analysis, self-perceived metacognition in interpreting trainees can be defined
as a construct made up of four dimensions: self-knowledge perception,
consolidation of one’s own set of criteria, development of a macro-strategy, and
task-focused flow.
Article outline
- 1.Relating metacognition to quality in interpreting
- 2.Turning metacognition into a more tangible construct
- 3.Methodology
- 4.The four dimensions of self-perceived metacognition
- 4.1Self-knowledge perception
- 4.2Consolidation of their own set of criteria
- 4.3Development of an interpreting macro-strategy
- 4.4Task-focused flow
- 5.Final remarks
- Note
-
References
References
Aguirre Fernández Bravo, Elena
2015 El desarrollo metacognitivo del estudiante de interpretación: estudio de
caso [
The Interpreting student's metacognitive development: a case study]. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia Comillas.
[URL]
Arumí Ribas, Marta
2008 “
La práctica reflexiva en la formación de intérpretes [Reflective
practice in interpreter training].” In
La traducción del futuro: Mediación lingüística y cultural en el siglo
XXI. Actas del III congreso internacional de la Asociación Ibérica de
Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación. Barcelona 22–24 de marzo de
2007. Edited by
L. Pegenaute,
J. A. Decesaris,
M. Tricás, and
E. Bernal, 442–454. Barcelona: Publicaciones Periódicas Universitarias.
Bandura, Albert
2002 Self-efficacy. The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Blignault, Ilse, Maria Stephanou and Cassandra Barrett
Bransford, John D., Brown, Ann L., and Rodney R. Cocking
1999 How People Learn. Brain, Mind, Experience and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bühler, Hildegund
(
1986) “
Linguistic (Semantic) and Extra-linguistic (Pragmatic) Criteria
for the Evaluation of Conference Interpretation and
Interpreters.”
Multilingua 5 (4): 231–235.
Chiaro, Delia C., and Giuseppe Nocella
2004 “
Interpreter’s Perception of Linguistic and Non-linguistic Factors
Affecting Quality: A Survey through the World Wide Web.”
Meta 49 (2): 278–293.
Collados Aís, Ángela, Ma Manuela Fernández Sánchez, Esperanza M. Pradas Macías, Elisabeth Stévaux, and Luisa Von Bernstorff
2003 “
Material audiovisual sobre interpretación
simultánea: Investigación experimental en evaluación de la
calidad” [Audiovisual material form simultaneous interpreting:
Experimental research on quality assessment]. In
La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: Docencia y
profesión. Edited by
Á. Collados,
Ma M. Fernández,
E. M. Pradas,
C. Sánchez-Adam, and
E. Stévaux, 17–29. Granada: Comares.
Csíkszentmihályi, Mihály
1975 Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Doǧan, Aymil, Marta Arumí Ribas, and Begonya Mora Rubio
2009 “
Metacognitive Tools in Interpreting Training: A Pilot
Study.”
Journal of Faculty of Letters, Hacettepe University 26 (1): 69–84.
Flavell, John H.
1976 “
Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving.” In
The Nature of Intelligence. Edited by
L. B. Resnick, 231–236. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gile, Daniel
1985 “
Le modèle d’efforts et l’équilibre d’interprétation
en interprétation simultanée” [The model of efforts and interpreting balance in
simultaneous interpreting].
Meta 30 (1): 44–48.
Gopher, Daniel
1993 “
The Skill of Attention Control: Acquisition and Execution of
Attention Strategies.” In
Attention and Performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology,
artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience—A silver
jubilee. Edited by
D. E. Meyer, and
S. Kornblum, 299–322. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hale, Sandra, and Uldis Ozolins
Harris, Brian
2003 “
The Need for Several Standards of Conference
Interpretation.” In
La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: Docencia y
profesión. Edited by
Á. Collados,
Ma M. Fernández,
E. M. Pradas,
C. Sánchez-Adam, and
E. Stévaux, 3–16. Granada: Comares.
Kalina, Sylvia
2005 “
Quality Assurance for Interpreting Processes.”
Meta 50 (2): 768–784.
Kurz, Ingrid
1993 “
Conference Interpretation: Expectations of Different User
Groups.”
The Interpreter’s Newsletter 51: 13–21.
Mason, Ian
1999 “
Introduction.”
Dialogue interpreting. The Translator 5 (2): 147–160.
Moser, Peter
1995 Survey on Expectations of Users of Conference Interpretation. Accessed 11 September
2018
[URL]
Moser-Mercer, Barbara
1996 “
Quality in Interpreting: Some Methodological
Issues.”
The Interpreter’s Newsletter 71: 43–55.
Moser-Mercer, Barbara
2000 “
The Rocky Road to Expertise in Interpreting: Eliciting Knowledge
from Learners.” In
Translationswissenschaft. Edited by
M. Kadric,
K. Kaindl, &
F. Pöchhacker, 339–352. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
Pignataro, Clara, and Silvia Velardi
2013 “
The Quest for Quality Assessment Criteria in Media
Interpreting.” In
Quality in Interpreting: Widening the Scope. Edited by
O. García,
E. M. Pradas, and
R. Barranco, 129–147. Granada: Comares.
Pintrich, Paul R.
2004 “
A Conceptual Framework for Assessing Motivation and
Self-Regulated Learning in College Students.”
Educational Psychology Review 16 (4): 385–407.
Pöchhacker, Franz
2001 “
Quality Assessment in Conference and Community
Interpreting.”
Meta 46 (2): 410–425.
Pöchhacker, Franz
2013 ”
Researching Quality: A Two-pronged Approach.” In
Quality in Interpreting: Widening the Scope. Edited by
O. García,
E. M. Pradas, and
R. Barranco, 33–55. Granada: Comares.
Pradas Macías, Esperanza M.
2007 “
La incidencia del parámetro
fluidez
” [Repercussions of the fluency parameter]. In
La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación simultánea: Parámetros de
incidencia. Edited by
Á. Collados,
E. M. Pradas,
E. Stévaux and
O. García, 53–70. Granada: Comares.
Rennert, Sylvie
2013 “
The Production of Experimental Material for Fluency
Research.” In
Quality in interpreting: widening the scope. Edited by
O. García,
E. M. Pradas, and
R. Barranco, 175–200. Granada: Comares.
Sawyer, David B.
1994 “
Monitoring Processes in Conference Interpreting: Towards a Model
for Interpreter-Trainees.”
Meta 39 (3): 433–438.
Setton, Robin
2002 “
Deconstructing SI: A Contribution to the Debate on Component
Processes.”
The Interpreter’s Newsletter 111: 1–26.
Tolosa Igualada, Miguel
2013 “
Del ‘síndrome de Mafalda’ a la metacognición. La
autoevaluación de la calidad de los intérpretes en formación a través de una
nueva plataforma multimedia” [From ‘Mafalda’s Syndrom to metacognition.
Interpreting trainee quality self-assessment through a new multimedia
platform]. In
Quality in Interpreting: Widening the Scope. Edited by
O. García,
E. M. Pradas, and
R. Barranco, 315–335. Granada: Comares.
Torre Puente, Juan C.
2007 Una triple alianza para un aprendizaje universitario de
calidad [
A triple alliance for quality higher
education]. Madrid: Universidad Pontificia Comillas.
Viaggio, Sergio
2003 “
La calidad en la mediación interlingüe. Qué es,
quién la determina, quién la juzga y quién la enseña” [Quality in interlinguistic mediation. What is it? who determines it? who evaluates it? and who teaches it?]. In
La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: Docencia y
profesión. Edited by
Á. Collados,
Ma M. Fernández,
E. M. Pradas,
C. Sánchez-Adam, and
E. Stévaux, 17–29. Granada: Comares.
Zwischenberger, Cornelia
2013 Qualität und Rollenbilder beim simultanen
Konferenzdolmetschen [
Quality and role construction in simultaneous
interpreting]. Berlin: Frank & Timme.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2020.
Translation and Interpreting Assessment Research. In
Translator and Interpreter Education Research [
New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ],
► pp. 61 ff.
Zhu, Xuelian & Vahid Aryadoust
2022.
A Synthetic Review of Cognitive Load in Distance Interpreting: Toward an Explanatory Model.
Frontiers in Psychology 13
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.