Practices and attitudes toward replication in empirical translation and interpreting studies
ChristianOlalla-Soler
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Abstract
This article presents the results of three studies on practices in and attitudes toward replication in empirical
translation and interpreting studies. The first study reports on a survey in which 52 researchers in translation and interpreting
with experience in empirical research answered questions about their practices in and attitudes toward replication. The survey
data were complemented by a bibliometric study of publications indexed in the Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation (BITRA)
(Franco Aixelá 2001–2019) that explicitly stated in the title or abstract that they
were derived from a replication. In a second bibliometric study, a conceptual replication of Yeung’s (2017) study on the acceptance of replications in neuroscience journals was conducted by analyzing 131
translation and interpreting journals. The article aims to provide evidence-based arguments for initiating a debate about the need
for replication in empirical translation and interpreting studies and its implications for the development of the discipline.
This article presents the results obtained in a series of studies aiming to describe the practices and attitudes of researchers conducting empirical studies in the field of translation and interpreting studies (TIS) regarding replication. Replication is defined as the repetition of the methods that led to a reported finding (Schmidt 2009).
References
Alves, Fabio, Adriana Pagano, and Igor da Silva
2011 “Towards an Investigation of Reading Modalities in/for Translation: An Exploratory Study Using Eye-Tracking Data.” In Cognitive Explorations of Translation, edited by Sharon O’Brien, 175–196. London: Continuum.
Baker, Monya, and Dan Penny
2016 “Is There a Reproducibility Crisis?” Nature 533 (7604): 452–454.
Begley, C. Glenn
2013 “Six Red Flags for Suspect Work.” Nature 497 (7450): 433–434.
2014 “Priming, Replication, and the Hardest Science.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9 (1): 40–48.
Crandall, Christian S., and Jeffrey W. Sherman
2016 “On the Scientific Superiority of Conceptual Replications for Scientific Progress.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66: 93–99.
Everitt, Brian S.
1998The Cambridge Dictionary of Statistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fabrigar, Leandre R., and Duane T. Wegener
2016 “Conceptualizing and Evaluating the Replication of Research Results.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66: 68–80.
Fanelli, Daniele
2009 “How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data.” PLoS ONE 4 (5): 1–11.
Fanelli, Daniele
2010 “ ‘Positive’ Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences.” PLoS ONE 5 (4): e10068.
Fanelli, Daniele
2018 “Opinion: Is Science Really Facing a Reproducibility Crisis, and Do We Need It To?” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 (11): 2628–2631.
Ferguson, Christopher J., and Moritz Heene
2012 “A Vast Graveyard of Undead Theories.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 555–561.
Feyerabend, Paul
1978Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. London: Verso.
Fiedler, Klaus, and Norbert Schwarz
2016 “Questionable Research Practices Revisited.” Social Psychological and Personality Science 7 (1): 45–52.
2000 “The History of Research into Conference Interpreting.” Target 12 (2): 297–321.
Graham, Loren, and Jean-Michel Kantor
2007 ““Soft” Area Studies versus “Hard” Social Science: A False Opposition.” Slavic Review 66 (1): 1–19.
Gupta, Brij Mohan, and S. M. Dhawan
2019 “Machine Translation Research: A Scientometric Assessment of Global Publications Output during 2007 16.” DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 39 (1): 31–38.
Hale, Sandra, and Jemina Napier
2013Research Methods in Interpreting. London: Bloomsbury.
Hedges, Larry V.
1987 “How Hard Is Hard Science, How Soft Is Soft Science? The Empirical Cumulativeness of Research.” American Psychologist 42 (5): 443–455.
Holmes, James S.
(1972) 1988 “The Name and Nature of Translation Studies.” In Translated! Papers on Literary Translation and Translation Studies, edited by Raymond van den Broeck, 67–80. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
House, Juliane
2013 “Towards a New Linguistic-Cognitive Orientation in Translation Studies.” Target 25 (1): 46–60.
Hsieh, Hsiu-Fang, and Sarah E. Shannon
2005 “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis.” Qualitative Health Research 15 (9): 1277–1288.
Hüffmeier, Joachim, Jens Mazei, and Thomas Schultze
2016 “Reconceptualizing Replication as a Sequence of Different Studies: A Replication Typology.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66: 81–92.
Hurtado Albir, Amparo, and Fabio Alves
2009 “Translation as a Cognitive Activity.” In The Routledge Companion to Translation Studies, edited by Jeremy Munday, 54–73. London: Routledge.
Ioannidis, John P. A.
2005 “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False.” PLoS Medicine 2 (8): 696–701.
Jussim, Lee, Jarret T. Crawford, Stephanie M. Anglin, Sean T. Stevens, and Jose L. Duarte
2016 “Interpretations and Methods: Towards a More Effectively Self-Correcting Social Psychology.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 66: 116–133.
Kuhn, Thomas S.
1962The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Li, Defeng
2004 “Trustworthiness of Think-Aloud Protocols in the Study of Translation Processes.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 14 (3): 301–313.
Liu, Minhua
2011 “Methodology in Interpreting Studies: A Methodological Review of Evidence-Based Research.” In Advances in Interpreting Research: Inquiry in Action, edited by Brenda Nicodemus and Lauria A. Swabey, 85–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Makel, Matthew C., Jonathan A. Plucker, and Boyd Hegarty
2012 “Replications in Psychology Research.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 537–542.
Martin, G. N., and Richard M. Clarke
2017 “Are Psychology Journals Anti-Replication? A Snapshot of Editorial Practices.” Frontiers in Psychology 8: 1–6.
Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson
2017Quantitative Research Methods in Translation and Interpreting Studies. New York: Routledge.
Moonesinghe, Ramal, Muin J. Khoury, and A. Cecile J. W. Janssens
2007 “Most Published Research Findings Are False – But a Little Replication Goes a Long Way.” PLoS Medicine 4 (2): 218–221.
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
2010 “Leave No Stone Unturned: On the Development of Cognitive Translatology.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 5 (2): 145–162.
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
2014 “A Blurred Snapshot of Advances in Translation Process Research.” MonTI special issue – Minding Translation 1: 49–84.
Neunzig, Wilhelm, and Helena Tanqueiro
2007Estudios empíricos en traducción. Enfoques y métodos. Girona: Documenta Universitaria.
O’Brien, Sharon
ed.2011Cognitive Explorations of Translation. London: Continuum.
O’Brien, Sharon
2013 “The Borrowers: Researching the Cognitive Aspects of Translation.” Target 25 (1): 5–17.
Open Science Collaboration
2015 “Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science.” Science 349 (6251): aac4716.
Orero, Pilar, Stephen Doherty, Jan-Louis Kruger, Anna Matamala, Jan Pedersen, Elisa Perego, Pablo Romero-Fresco, Sara Rovira-Esteva, Olga Soler-Vilageliu, and Agnieszka Szarkowska
2018 “Conducting Experimental Research in Audiovisual Translation (AVT): A Position Paper.” Journal of Specialised Translation 30: 105–126.
Pardo, Antonio, and Ricardo San Martín
2012Análisis de datos en ciencias sociales y de la salud II. Madrid: Editorial Síntesis.
Pashler, Harold, and Christine R. Harris
2012 “Is the Replicability Crisis Overblown? Three Arguments Examined.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 531–536.
Polit, Denise F., and Cheryl Tatano Beck
2010 “Generalization in Quantitative and Qualitative Research: Myths and Strategies.” International Journal of Nursing Studies 47 (11): 1451–1458.
Popper, Karl
1959The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.
Ravitch, Sharon M., and Nicole Mittenfelner Carl
2016Qualitative Research: Bridging the Conceptual, Theoretical and Methodological. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Rovira-Esteva, Sara, and Javier Franco Aixelá
2018 “Bibliometric Tools.” In A History of Modern Translation Knowledge: Sources, Concepts, Effects, edited by Lieven D’hulst and Yves Gambier, 117–122. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Saldanha, Gabriela, and Sharon O’Brien
2014Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. London: Routledge.
Schmidt, Stefan
2009 “Shall We Really Do It Again? The Powerful Concept of Replication Is Neglected in the Social Sciences.” Review of General Psychology 13 (2): 90–100.
Simons, Daniel J.
2014 “The Value of Direct Replication.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9 (1): 76–80.
Snell-Hornby, Mary
2006The Turns of Translation Studies: New Paradigms or Shifting Viewpoints?Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tymoczko, Maria
2002 “Connecting the Two Infinite Orders: Research Methods in Translation Studies.” In Crosscultural Transgressions: Research Models in Translation Studies II: Historical and Ideological Issues, edited by Theo Hermans, 9–25. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Tymoczko, Maria
2005 “Trajectories of Research in Translation Studies.” Meta 50 (4): 1082–1097.
Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan, Ruud Wetzels, Denny Borsboom, Han L. J. van der Maas, and Rogier A. Kievit
2012 “An Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6): 632–638.
Way, Catherine
2014 “Structuring a Legal Translation Course: A Framework for Decision-Making in Legal Translator Training.” In The Ashgate Handbook of Legal Translation, edited by Le Cheng, King-Kui Sin, and Anne Wagner, 135–152. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Yeung, Andy W. K.
2017 “Do Neuroscience Journals Accept Replications? A Survey of Literature.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 11: 1–6.
Zanettin, Federico, Gabriela Saldanha, and Sue-Ann Harding
2015 “Sketching Landscapes in Translation Studies: A Bibliographic Study.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 23 (2): 37–41.