Article published In:
Culture and Society[Translation Spaces 5:2] 2016
► pp. 222–243
Human factors in machine translation and post-editing among institutional translators
In September 2015, the ADAPT Centre for Digital Content Technology carried out a focus group study of 70 translators at the
European Commission’s Directorate-General for Translation (DGT). The aim was to better understand the factors involved in the
translators’ adoption and non-adoption of machine translation (MT) during their translation tasks. Our analysis showed that, while
broadly positive attitudes to MT could be observed, MT was not consistently adopted for all tasks. We argue that ergonomic factors
related to a human translator’s needs, abilities, limitations, and overall well-being heavily impacted on participants’ decisions
to use MT or not in their tasks. We further claim that it is only by taking into account the special institutional circumstances
in which the activity of DGT translation is situated that these ergonomic factors can be fully understood and explained.
References (40)
Barbour, Rosaline. 2007. Doing Focus Groups. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. 
Bonet, Josep. 2013. Honing Quality in 23 Languages MT @ EC—The Right Foundation. Unpublished DGT intranet report. Accessed May 25, 2015.
Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. 2006. “Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101.
Castilho, Sheila, Sharon O’Brien, Fabio Alves, and Morgan O’Brien. 2014. “Does Post-Editing Increase Usability? A Study with Brazilian Portuguese as Target Language.” In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation, edited by Marko Tadić, Philipp Koehn, Johann Roturier, and Andy Way, 183–190. Dubrovnik: EAMT.
Cronin, Michael. 2013. Translation in the Digital Age. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
DePalma, Donald A., and Benjamin B. Sargent. 2013. Transformative Translation. Cambridge: Common Sense Advisory.
DePalma, Donald A., Vijayalaxmi Hegde, Hélène Pielmeier, and Robert G. Stewart. 2013. The Language Services Market: 2013. Cambridge: Common Sense Advisory.
Doherty, Stephen, and Sharon O’Brien. 2014. “Assessing the Usability of Raw Machine Translated Output: A User-Centered Study Using Eye Tracking.” International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 30 (1): 40–51.
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen. 2014. “Challenges of Translation Process Research at the Workplace.” MonTI Monographs in Translation and Interpreting Special Issue 11: 355–383.
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Gary Massey. 2014. “Translators and Machines: Working Together.” In Proceedings of the XXth World Congress of the International Federation of Translators (Vol. I), edited by Wolfram Baur, Brigitte Eichner, Sylvia Kalina, Norma Keßler, Felix Mayer, and Jeanette Ørsted, 199–207. Berlin: BDÜ.
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Sharon O’Brien. 2015. “Ergonomics of the Translation Workplace: Potential for Cognitive Friction.” Translation Spaces 4 (1): 98–118.
Eisele, Andreas. 2013. “MT@EC: Serving the Multilingual Needs of the European Commission.” Paper presented at
8th Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation
, Sofia, August 8.
European Commission. 2012. Translation Tools and Workflow. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Gaspari, Federico, Antonio Toral, Sudip Kumar Naskar, Declan Groves, and Andy Way. 2014. “Perception vs Reality: Measuring Machine Translation Post-Editing Productivity.” In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas: Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice (WPTP3), edited by Sharon O’Brien, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 60–72. Vancouver: AMTA.
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.
International Ergonomics Association. 2016. Definition and Domains of Ergonomics. Accessed June 7, 2016. [URL].
Koskinen, Kaisa. 2008. Translating Institutions: An Ethnographic Study of EU Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Koskinen, Kaisa, and Minna Ruokonen. Forthcoming. “Love Letters or Hate Mail? Translators’ Affective Responses to Technology.” In Human Issues in Translation Technology, edited by Dorothy Kenny. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Kluvanec, Daniel. 2013. “The Way Forward with MT@EC in 2014 and Beyond.” Paper presented at
European Parliament Science and Technology Options Assessment
, Brussels, December 3.
. 2014. “Getting the Right Mix: Approaches to Machine Translation in the European Commission.” In Proceedings of the XXth World Congress of the International Federation of Translators (Vol. I1), edited by Wolfram Baur, Brigitte Eichner, Sylvia Kalina, Norma Keßler, Felix Mayer, and Jeanette Ørsted, 51–57. Berlin: BDÜ.
Koponen, Maarit. 2012. “Comparing Human Perceptions of Post-Editing Effort with Post-Editing Operations.” In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, 181–190. New York: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Lagoudaki, Elina. 2006. “Translation Memories Survey 2006: Users’ Perceptions around TM Use.” Paper presented at
Translating and the Computer 28
, London, November 16–17.
. 2008. Expanding the Possibilities of Translation Memory Systems: From the Translator’s Wishlist to the Developer’s Design. PhD Thesis, Imperial College London.
Lavault-Olléon, Élisabeth. 2011. “Une introduction à la problématique « Traduction et Ergonomie » [Introducing Translation and Ergonomics].” ILCEA Traduction et Ergonomie. Accessed May 17, 2016. [URL].
Le Blanc, Matthieu. 2013. “Translators on Translation Memory (TM): Results of an Ethnographic Study in Three Translation Services and Agencies.” Translation and Interpreting 5 (2): 1–13.
Liamputtong, Pranee. 2011. Focus Group Methodology: Principle and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Moorkens, Joss, Sharon O’Brien, Igor A.L. da Silva, Norma B. de Lima Fonseca, and Fabio Alves. 2015. “Correlations of Perceived Post-Editing Effort with Measurements of Actual Effort”. Machine Translation 29 (3-4): 267–284.
Moorkens, Joss, and Sharon O’Brien. Forthcoming. “Assessing User Interface Needs of Post-Editors of Machine Translation.” In Human Issues in Translation Technology, edited by Dorothy Kenny. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Morgan, David L. 1997. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
O’Brien, Sharon. 2012. “Translation as Human-Computer Interaction.” Translation Spaces 11: 101–122.
O’Brien, Sharon, Maureen Enhrensberger-Dow, Marcel Hasler, and Megan Connolly. Submitted. “Irritating CAT Tool Features that Matter to Translators” submitted to Hermes, Journal of Language and Communication, Special Issue on Translation Technology.
Pilos, Spyridon. 2014. “MT@EC – The New Machine Translation of the European Commission.” Paper presented at
CEF Information Day
, Luxembourg, January 16.
Plitt, Mirko, and François Masselot. 2010. “A Productivity Test of Statistical Machine Translation Post-Editing in a Typical Localisation Context.” The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 931: 7–16.
Pym, Anthony, Alexander Perekrestenko, and Bram Starink. 2006. Translation Technology and Its Teaching: (With Much Mention of Localization). Tarragona: Intercultural Studies Group, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.
Risku, Hanna. 2010. “A Cognitive Scientific View on Technical Communication and Translation: Do Embodiment and Situatedness Really Make a Difference?” Target: International Journal of Translation Studies 22 (01): 94–111.
Risku, Hanna, and Florian Windhager. 2013. “Extended Translation: A Socio-Cognitive Research Agenda.” Target: International Journal of Translation Studies 25 (1): 33–45.
Rummel, Dieter. 2015. Machine Translation Annual Activity Report 2014. Unpublished DGT intranet report. Accessed May 25, 2015.
Stewart, D. Friedman, and Prem N. Shamdasani. 2015. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Teixeira, Carlos S.C. 2014. “Perceived vs. Measured Performance in the Post-Editing of Suggestions from Machine Translation and Translation Memories” In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas: Workshop on Post-Editing Technology and Practice (WPTP3), edited by Sharon O’Brien, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 450–59. Vancouver: AMTA.
Van den Bergh, Jan, Eva Geurts, Donald Degraen, Mieke Haesen, Iulianna van der Lek-Ciudin, and Karin Coninx. 2016. “Recommendations for Translation Environments to Improve Translators’ Workflows.” Paper presented at
Translating and the Computer 38
, London, November 17–18.
Cited by (30)
Cited by 30 other publications
Omar, Lamis Ismail & Abdelrahman Abdalla Salih
2024. Systematic Review of English/Arabic Machine Translation Postediting: Implications for AI Application in Translation Research and Pedagogy. Informatics 11:2 ► pp. 23 ff. 
Ruokonen, Minna & Elin Svahn
Salloum, Said A., Rose A. Aljanada, Aseel M. Alfaisal, Mohammed Rasol Al Saidat & Raghad Alfaisal
2024. Exploring the Acceptance of ChatGPT for Translation: An Extended TAM Model Approach. In Artificial Intelligence in Education: The Power and Dangers of ChatGPT in the Classroom [Studies in Big Data, 144], ► pp. 527 ff.
Sánchez-Castany, Roser
2024. Industry Insights About Translation Technologies: Current Needs and Future Trends. In New Advances in Translation Technology [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 99 ff.
Tian, Sha & Wenjiao Yang
2024. Modeling the use behavior of interpreting technology for student interpreters: An extension of UTAUT model. Education and Information Technologies 29:9 ► pp. 10499 ff.
Vega Exposito, Miguel
2024. Análisis cuantitativo de traducciones del inglés al español poseditadas por traductores institucionales. Entreculturas. Revista de Traducción y Comunicación Intercultural :14 ► pp. 80 ff.
Briva-Iglesias, Vicent, Sharon O’Brien & Benjamin R. Cowan
2023. The impact of traditional and interactive post-editing on Machine Translation User Experience, quality, and productivity. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 6:1 ► pp. 60 ff.
Fan, Lu
2023. Effectiveness model of automatic machine translation of publicity texts based on deep learning. Soft Computing
Killman, Jeffrey
2023. Machine translation and legal terminology. In Handbook of Terminology [Handbook of Terminology, 3], ► pp. 485 ff.
Killman, Jeffrey
2024. Machine translation literacy in the legal translation context: a SWOT analysis perspective. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 18:2 ► pp. 271 ff.
Shih, Claire Y.
2023. Navigating the Web,
Biel, Łucja
2022. Translating Legal Texts. In The Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ► pp. 379 ff.
Cennamo, Ilaria & Loïc de Faria Pires
2022. Intelligence artificielle et traduction. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 20:2 ► pp. 333 ff.
Olohan, Maeve
2022. Translating Technical Texts. In The Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ► pp. 321 ff.
Bi, Shengqin, Andino Maseleno, Xiaohui Yuan & Valentina E. Balas
2020. Intelligent system for English translation using automated knowledge base. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems 39:4 ► pp. 5057 ff.
de Faria Pires, Loïc
2020. Master’s students’ post-editing perception and
strategies. FORUM. Revue internationale d’interprétation et de traduction / International Journal of Interpretation and Translation 18:1 ► pp. 26 ff.
Guerberof-Arenas, Ana & Antonio Toral
2020. The impact of post-editing and machine translation on creativity and reading experience. Translation Spaces 9:2 ► pp. 255 ff.
Kappus, Martin & Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
2020. The ergonomics of translation tools: understanding when less is actually more. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14:4 ► pp. 386 ff.
Kenny, Dorothy, Joss Moorkens & Félix do Carmo
Mossop, Brian
2020. Subjective Responses to Translation Memory Policy in the Workplace. TTR 32:1 ► pp. 309 ff.
Nunes Vieira, Lucas & Elisa Alonso
2020. Translating perceptions and managing expectations: an analysis of management and production perspectives on machine translation. Perspectives 28:2 ► pp. 163 ff.
O’Brien, Sharon & Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
Tang, Jun
2020. Graduate-level career preparation for Chinese translation students: a perspective of educational ergonomics. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14:4 ► pp. 405 ff.
van Egdom, Gys-Walt, Patrick Cadwell, Hendrik Kockaert & Winibert Segers
2020. A turn to ergonomics in translator and interpreter training. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14:4 ► pp. 363 ff.
Sánchez-Gijón, Pilar, Joss Moorkens & Andy Way
2019. Post-editing neural machine translation versus translation memory segments. Machine Translation 33:1-2 ► pp. 31 ff.
Yang, Yanxia & Xiangling Wang
2019. Modeling the intention to use machine translation for student translators: An extension of Technology Acceptance Model. Computers & Education 133 ► pp. 116 ff.
Cadwell, Patrick, Sharon O’Brien & Carlos S. C. Teixeira
2018. Resistance and accommodation: factors for the (non-) adoption of machine translation among professional translators. Perspectives 26:3 ► pp. 301 ff.
Moorkens, Joss, Antonio Toral, Sheila Castilho & Andy Way
2018. Translators’ perceptions of literary post-editing using statistical and neural machine translation. Translation Spaces 7:2 ► pp. 240 ff.
Risku, Hanna, Regina Rogl & Jelena Milosevic
Risku, Hanna, Regina Rogl & Jelena Milosevic
2019. Translation practice in the field: Current research on socio-cognitive processes. In Translation Practice in the Field [Benjamins Current Topics, 105], ► pp. 1 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 july 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.