Cover not available
Article published In:
Translation Practice in the Field: Current research on socio-cognitive processes
Edited by Hanna Risku, Regina Rogl and Jelena Milosevic
[Translation Spaces 6:1] 2017
► pp. 79–103

Investigating the cognitive ergonomic aspects of translation tools in a workplace setting

ORCID logo | Centre for Translation and Textual Studies, Adapt Research Centre, Dublin City University
ORCID logo | Centre for Translation and Textual Studies, Adapt Research Centre, Dublin City University

This paper reports on an empirical study that investigates the translation process in the workplace from a cognitive ergonomic perspective. In particular, the interaction between ten translators employed by a language service provider and the tools they deploy are examined. To that end, we recorded the translators’ workplace activities using keystroke logging, screen recording and eye tracking, combined with short retrospective interviews. We analysed their behaviour in terms of how they switched between the two screens on their desks, how they used different tools and where they invested their visual attention. Data related to productivity and quality are also presented. Among other findings, our data reveal that validation searches for terms and general expressions lead to considerable tool and task switching among professional translators.

Keywords: translation technology, CAT tools, memoQ, cognitive ergonomics, human-computer interaction, terminology search, workplace study, eye tracking
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Cognitive ergonomics
    • 1.2Workplace studies
    • 1.3CAT tools
    • 1.4Expected contribution
  • 2.Study setup
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Translation tasks
    • 2.3The translation tool
  • 3.Data collection and processing
  • 4.Results and analyses
    • 4.1Basic hardware and software
    • 4.2Use of tools
    • 4.3Consultation of information resources
    • 4.4Use of screens
    • 4.5Gaze behaviour
    • 4.6Productivity and quality
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 October 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.6.1.05tei
References
Brunette, Louise, and Sharon O’Brien
2011 “Quelle ergonomie pour la pratique postéditrice des textes traduits? [Ergonomics and Postediting in Translation].” ILCEA 141. Accessed February 14, 2017. [URL].
Cooper, Alan
2004 The Inmates are Running the Asylum: Why High-Tech Products Drive Us Crazy and How to Restore the Sanity. Indianapolis, IN: Sams.Google Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara
2006 “Computer-Aided Translation as a Distributed Cognitive Task.” Pragmatics & Cognition 14 (2): 443–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen
2014 “Challenges of Translation Process Research at the Workplace.” In Minding Translation, guest edited by R. Muñoz, 355–383. Special Issue 1 of MonTi. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Andrea Hunziker Heeb
2016 “Investigating the Ergonomics of the Technologized Translation Workplace.” In Reembedding Translation Process Research, edited by R. Muñoz, 69–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Sharon O’Brien
2015 “Ergonomics of the Translation Workplace: Potential for Cognitive Friction”. Translation Spaces 4 (1): 98–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Federico, Marcello, Alessandro Cattelan, and Marco Trombetti
2012 “Measuring User Productivity in Machine Translation Enhanced Computer Assisted Translation”. In Proceedings of the Tenth Biennial Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas (AMTA), San Diego, CA, October 28 – November 1, 2012. Accessed March 15, 2017. [URL].
Harnad, Stevan
2005 “Distributed Processes, Distributed Cognizers, and Collaborative Cognition.” Pragmatics & Cognition 13 (3): 501–514. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobsen, Arnt L.
2002 “Translation Drafting by Professional Translators and by Translation Students.” Copenhagen Studies in Language 271: 191–204.Google Scholar
Lavault-Olléon, Élisabeth
2011 “L’ergonomie, nouveau paradigme pour la traductologie” [Ergonomics as a New Paradigm for Translation Studies]. ILCEA 141. Accessed February 14, 2017. [URL].
Leijten, Marielle, and Luuk van Waes
2013 “Keystroke Logging in Writing Research: Using Inputlog to Analyze and Visualize Writing Processes”. Written Communication 30 (3): 358–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon
2010 “Eye Tracking in Translation Process Research: Methodological Challenges and Solutions.” In Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research, edited by I. Mees, F. Alves, and S. Göpferich, 251–266. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
2012 “Translation as Human-Computer Interaction.” Translation Spaces 1 (1): 101–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna
2014 “Translation Process Research as Interaction Research: From Mental to Socio-Cognitive Processes.” In Minding Translation, guest edited by R. Muñoz, 331–353. Special Issue 1 of MonTi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Risku, Hanna, Florian Windhager, and Matthias Apfelthaler
2013 “A Dynamic Network Model of Translatorial Cognition and Action.” Translation Spaces 2 (1): 151–182. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Teixeira, Carlos S. C.
2014a “Data Collection Methods for Researching the Interaction between Translators and Translation Tools – An ‘Ecological’ Approach.” In The Development of Translation Competence: Theories and Methodologies from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Science, edited by J. W. Schwieter and A. Ferreira, 269–286. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
2014b The Impact of Metadata on Translator Performance: How Translators Work with Translation Memories and Machine Translation. Doctoral thesis, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain.Google Scholar
Zhang, Jiajie
1997 “The Nature of External Representations in Problem Solving.” Cognitive Science 21 (2): 179–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 16 other publications

Balashov, Yuri
2020. The Translator’s Extended Mind. Minds and Machines 30:3 ► pp. 349 ff. DOI logo
Daems, Joke & Lieve Macken
2019. Interactive adaptive SMT versus interactive adaptive NMT: a user experience evaluation. Machine Translation 33:1-2 ► pp. 117 ff. DOI logo
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen
2021. Ergonomics and translation workplaces. In Handbook of Translation Studies [Handbook of Translation Studies, 5], ► pp. 68 ff. DOI logo
Freiwald, Jonas, Zoë Miljanović, Arndt Heilmann & Stella Neumann
2024. Ecological validity in corpus-based and experimental translation research. Ampersand 12 ► pp. 100155 ff. DOI logo
García, Álvaro Marín
2021. Bridging the epistemological gap. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8:2 ► pp. 462 ff. DOI logo
Gough, Joanna
2019. Developing translation-oriented research competence: what can we learn from professional translators?. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 13:3 ► pp. 342 ff. DOI logo
Haapaniemi, Riku
2023. How production and distribution processes shape translations in organisations. Translation Spaces 12:1 ► pp. 74 ff. DOI logo
Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
2023. Augmentation and translation crowdsourcing. Translation, Cognition & Behavior DOI logo
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. DOI logo
Man, Deliang, Aiping Mo, Meng Huat Chau, John Mitchell O’Toole & Charity Lee
2020. Translation technology adoption: evidence from a postgraduate programme for student translators in China. Perspectives 28:2 ► pp. 253 ff. DOI logo
Muñoz Gómez, Estefanía
2020. Non-professional translation in an Irish business setting: Considerations for global theory and national policy. Translation Studies 13:2 ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo
Sakamoto, Akiko
2022. Translation and Technology. In The Cambridge Handbook of Translation, ► pp. 55 ff. DOI logo
Sales, Dora
2023. Professional translators’ and interpreters’ views on information competence: An exploratory qualitative study from the Spanish context. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science ► pp. 096100062311641 ff. DOI logo
Taşkin, Burcu
2023. Olohan, Maeve (2021): Translation and Practice Theory. London/New York: Routledge, 154 p.. Meta 67:3 ► pp. 687 ff. DOI logo
Teixeira, Carlos, Joss Moorkens, Daniel Turner, Joris Vreeke & Andy Way
2019. Creating a Multimodal Translation Tool and Testing Machine Translation Integration Using Touch and Voice. Informatics 6:1 ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo
Teixeira, Carlos S. C. & Sharon O'Brien
2018. Chapter 3. Overcoming methodological challenges of eye tracking in the translation workplace. In Eye Tracking and Multidisciplinary Studies on Translation [Benjamins Translation Library, 143], ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 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.