Conducting replication in translation and interpreting studies

References

1. Allen, Mike, and Raymond Preiss
   1993 “Replication and Meta-analysis: A Necessary Connection.” Journal of Social Behavior & Personality (): –.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Asendorpf, Jens B., Mark Conner, Filip de Fruyt, Jan de Houwer, Jaap J. A. Denissen, Klaus Fiedler, Susann Fiedler, David C. Funder, Reinhold Kliegl, Brian A. Nosek, Marco Perugini, Brent W. Roberts, Manfred Schmitt, Marcel A. G. van Aken, Hannelore Weber, and Jelte M. Wicherts
   2013 “Recommendations for Increasing Replicability in Psychology.” European Association of Personality Psychology (): –. 10.1002/per.1919
   https://doi.org/10.1002/per.1919 [Google Scholar]
3. Baker, Monya
   2015 “Over Half of Psychology Studies Fail Reproducibility Test.” Nature (2015) 10.1038/nature.2015.18248
   https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2015.18248 [Google Scholar]
4. Brandt, Mark J., Hans Ijzerman, Ap Dijksterhuis, Frank J. Farach, Jason Geller, Roger Giner-Sorolla, James A. Grange, Marco Perugini, Jeffrey R. Spies, and Anna van’t Veer
   2014 “The Replication Recipe: What Makes for a Convincing Replication?” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology: –. 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.005
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.005 [Google Scholar]
5. Bühler, Hildegund
   1986 “Linguistic (Semantic) and Extra-linguistic (Pragmatic) Criteria for the Evaluation of Conference Interpretation and Interpreters.” Multilingua: –.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bunton, David
   2005 “The Structure of PhD Conclusion Chapters.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes (): –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.03.004
   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.03.004 [Google Scholar]
7. Cooper, Harris, Larry V. Hedges, and Jeffrey C. Valentine
   2019 “Potentials and Limitations of Research Synthesis.” InThe Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis, edited byHarris Cooper, Larry V. Hedges, and Jeffrey C. Valentine, –. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 10.7758/9781610448864.26
   https://doi.org/10.7758/9781610448864.26 [Google Scholar]
8. Easley, Richard W., Charles S. Madden, and Mark G. Dunn
   2000 “Conducting Marketing Science: The Role of Replication in the Research Process.” Journal of Business Research (): –. 10.1016/S0148‑2963(98)00079‑4
   https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(98)00079-4 [Google Scholar]
9. Flis, Gabriela, Adam Sikorski, and Agnieszka Szarkowska
   2020 “Does the Dubbing Effect Apply to Voice-over? A Conceptual Replication Study on Visual Attention and Immersion.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Ghiselli, Serena
    2022 “Working Memory Tasks in Interpreting Studies: A Meta-Analysis.” Translation, Cognition & Behavior (): –. 10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi [Google Scholar]
11. Gile, Daniel
    1990 “Scientific Research vs. Personal Theories in the Investigation of Interpretation.” InAspects of Applied and Experimental Research on Conference Interpretation, edited byLaura Gran and Christopher Taylor, –. Campanotte: Editore Udine.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Gile, Daniel
    1998 “Observational Studies and Experimental Studies in the Investigation of Conference Interpreting.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.10.1.04gil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.10.1.04gil [Google Scholar]
13. Gile, Daniel
    2006 “Conference Interpreting.” InEncyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, edited byKeith Brown, –. Boston: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/04285‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/04285-1 [Google Scholar]
14. Gile, Daniel
    2009 “Interpreting Studies: A Critical View from Within.” MonTI: –. 10.6035/MonTI.2009.1.6
    https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2009.1.6 [Google Scholar]
15. Gile, Daniel
    2011 “Preface.” InAdvances in Interpreting Research, edited byBrenda Nicodemus and Laurie Swabey, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Gile, Daniel
    2020 “The CIRIN Bulletin n°60.” https://www.cirin-gile.fr/bulletins/Bulletin-60-Jul-2020.pdf
17. Han, Chao, Xiaolei Lu, and Peixin Zhang
    2023 “Use of Statistical Methods in Translation and Interpreting Research: A Longitudinal Quantitative Analysis of Eleven Peer-Reviewed Journals (2000–2020).” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.21132.han
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.21132.han [Google Scholar]
18. Han, Chao, and Liuyan Yang
    2023 “Relating Utterance Fluency to Perceived Fluency of Interpreting: A Partial Replication and a Mini Meta-Analysis.” Translation and Interpreting Studies (): –. 10.1075/tis.20091.han
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.20091.han [Google Scholar]
19. Hubbard, Raymond, and John S. Armstrong
    1994 “Replications and Extensions in Marketing — Rarely Published but Quite Contrary.” International Journal of Research in Marketing: –. 10.1016/0167‑8116(94)90003‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8116(94)90003-5 [Google Scholar]
20. Hubbard, Raymond, and Daniel E. Vetter
    1996 “An Empirical Comparison of Published Replication Research in Accounting, Economics, Finance, Management, and Marketing.” Journal of Business Research ():–. 10.1016/0148‑2963(95)00084‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(95)00084-4 [Google Scholar]
21. Liu, Min-Hua
    2016 “Putting the Horse before the Cart: Righting the Experimental Approach in Interpreting Studies.” InAddressing Methodological Challenges in Interpreting Studies Research, edited byClaudio Bendazzoli and Claudia Monacelli, –. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Liu, Min-Hua
    2023 “User Expectations Research Revisited: Methodological Considerations.” InIntroducing New Hypertexts on Interpreting (Studies): A Tribute to Franz Pöchhacker, edited byCornelia Zwischenberger, Karin Reithofer, and Sylvi Rennert, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.160.03liu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.160.03liu [Google Scholar]
23. Lykken, David T.
    1968 “Statistical Significance in Psychological Research.” Psychological Bulletin: –. 10.1037/h0026141
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026141 [Google Scholar]
24. Makel, Matthew C., and Jonathan A. Plucker
    2014 “Facts are More Important than Novelty: Replication in the Education Sciences.” Educational Researcher (): –. 10.3102/0013189X14545513
    https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14545513 [Google Scholar]
25. Makel, Matthew C., Jonathan A. Plucker, and Boyd Hegarty
    2012 “Replications in Psychology Research: How Often do They Really Occur?” Perspectives in Psychological Science: –. 10.1177/1745691612460688
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460688 [Google Scholar]
26. Marsden, Emma, Kara Morgan-Short, Sophie Thompson, and David Abugaber
    2018 “Replication in Second Language Research: Narrative and Systematic Reviews and Recommendations for the Field.” Language Learning (): –. 10.1111/lang.12286
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12286 [Google Scholar]
27. Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson
    2017 Quantitative Research Methods in Translation and Interpreting Studies. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson
    2019 “Meta-Analyses of Simultaneous Interpreting and Working Memory.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.00026.mel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00026.mel [Google Scholar]
29. Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson
    2020 “Meta-Analysis and Replication in Interpreting Studies.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.00037.mel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00037.mel [Google Scholar]
30. Naranjo, Beatriz
    2020 “Can Music Inspire Translators? Using Background Music as a Trigger for Narrative Engagement in Literary Translation.” Translation and Interpreting Studies (): –. 10.1075/tis.18018.nar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.18018.nar [Google Scholar]
31. Olalla-Soler, Christian
    2020 “Practices and Attitudes toward Replication in Empirical Translation and Interpreting Studies.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.18159.ola
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.18159.ola [Google Scholar]
32. Orozco, Mariana
    2004 “The Clue to Common Research in Translation and Interpreting: Methodology.” InTranslation Research and Interpreting Research: Traditions, Gaps, and Synergies, edited byChristina Schäffner, –. London: Multilingual Matters. 10.2307/jj.27710981.14
    https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.27710981.14 [Google Scholar]
33. Patil, Prasad, Roger D. Peng, and Jeffrey T. Leek
    2016 “What Should Researchers Expect When They Replicate Studies? A Statistical View of Replicability in Psychological Science.” Perspectives on Psychological Science (): –. 10.1177/1745691616646366
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616646366 [Google Scholar]
34. Pöchhacker, Franz
    2011 “Replication in Research on Quality in Conference Interpreting.” T&I Review: –.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Polio, Charlene, and Susan Gass
    1997 “Replication and Reporting: A Commentary.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition: –. 10.1017/S027226319700404X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226319700404X [Google Scholar]
36. Porte, Graeme, and Keith Richards
    2012 “Replication in Second Language Writing Research.” Journal of Second Language Writing: –. 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.05.002 [Google Scholar]
37. Porte, Graeme
    2012 Replication Research in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Rosenthal, Robert
    1991 “Replication in Behavioral Research.” InReplication Research in the Social Sciences, edited byJames W. Neuliep, –. Newbury Park: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Rosenthal, Robert
    1997 “Some Issues in the Replication of Social Science Research.” Labour Economics: –. 10.1016/S0927‑5371(97)00012‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5371(97)00012-2 [Google Scholar]
40. Saldanha, Gabriela, and Sharon O’Brien
    2013 Research Methodologies in Translation Studies. Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Schmidt, Stefan
    2009 “Shall We Really Do it Again? The Powerful Concept of Replication is Neglected in the Social Sciences.” Review of General Psychology: –. 10.1037/a0015108
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015108 [Google Scholar]
42. Stroebe, Wolfgang, and Fritz Strack
    2014 “The Alleged Crisis and the Illusion of Exact Replication.” Perspectives on Psychological Science: –. 10.1177/1745691613514450
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613514450 [Google Scholar]
43. Valentine, Jeffrey C., Anthony Biglan, Robert F. Boruch, Felipe González Castro, Linda M. Collins, Brian R. Flay, Sheppard Kellam, Eve K. Mościcki, and Steven P. Schinke
    2011 “Replication in Prevention Science.” Prevention Science: –. 10.1007/s11121‑011‑0217‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-011-0217-6 [Google Scholar]
44. Bontempo, Karen, and Jemina Napier
    2011 “Evaluating Emotional Stability as a Predictor of Interpreter Competence and Aptitude for Interpreting.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.13.1.06bon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.1.06bon [Google Scholar]
45. Buchweitz, Augusto, and Fabio Alves
    2006 “Cognitive Adaptation in Translation: An Interface between Language Direction, Time, and Recursiveness in Target Text Production.” Letras de Hoje: –.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Colina, Sonia
    2008 “Translation Quality Evaluation: Empirical Evidence for a Functionalist Approach.” The Translator (): –. 10.1080/13556509.2008.10799251
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13556509.2008.10799251 [Google Scholar]
47. Dam, Helle Vrønning, and Karen Korning Zethsen
    2011 “The Status of Professional Business Translators on the Danish Market: A Comparative Study of Company, Agency and Freelance Translators.” Meta (): –. 10.7202/1011263ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/1011263ar [Google Scholar]
48. Dam, Helle Vrønning
    2004 “Interpreters’ Notes: On the Choice of Language.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.6.1.03dam
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.1.03dam [Google Scholar]
49. Fernández-Torné, Anna, and Anna Matamala
    2015 “Text-to-Speech vs. Human Voiced Audio Descriptions: A Reception Study in Films Dubbed into Catalan.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
    [Google Scholar]
50. González Davies, Maria
    2014 “Towards a Plurilingual Development Paradigm: From Spontaneous to Informed Use of Translation in Additional Language Learning.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer (): –. 10.1080/1750399X.2014.908555
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.908555 [Google Scholar]
51. Han, Chao
    2015a “(Para)linguistic Correlates of Perceived Fluency in English-to-Chinese Simultaneous Interpretation.” International Journal of Comparative Literature and Translation Studies (): –.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Han, Chao
    2015b “Lacunae, Myths and Legends about Conference Interpreters: A Diary Study to Explore Conference Interpreting Practice in China.” Perspectives (): –. 10.1080/0907676X.2014.973422
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2014.973422 [Google Scholar]
53. Han, Chao
    2022 “Assessing Spoken-Language Interpreting: The Method of Comparative Judgement.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.00068.han
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00068.han [Google Scholar]
54. Kobayashi, Masatomo, Trisha O’Connell, Bryan Gould, Hironobu Takagi, and Chieko Asakawa
    2010 “Are Synthesized Video Descriptions Acceptable?” InProceedings of the 12th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. October 2010, Orlando, Florida, USA. –. 10.1145/1878803.1878833
    https://doi.org/10.1145/1878803.1878833 [Google Scholar]
55. Laviosa, Sara
    1998a “Core Patterns of Lexical Use in a Comparable Corpus of English Narrative Prose.” Meta (): –. 10.7202/003425ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/003425ar [Google Scholar]
56. Laviosa, Sara
    1998b “The English Comparable Corpus: A Resource and a Methodology.” InUnity in Diversity? Current Trends in Translation Studies, edited byLynne Bowker, Michael Cronin, Dorothy Kenny, and Jennifer Pearson, –. Manchester: St. Jerome.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Makel, Matthew C., Jonathan A. Plucker, and Boyd Hegarty
    2012 “Replications in Psychology Research.” Perspectives on Psychological Science (): –. 10.1177/1745691612460688
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460688 [Google Scholar]
58. Perego, Elisa, Fabio Del Missier, and Sara Bottiroli
    2015 “Dubbing versus Subtitling in Young and Older Adults: Cognitive and Evaluative Aspects.” Perspectives (): –. 10.1080/0907676X.2014.912343
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2014.912343 [Google Scholar]
59. Pöchhacker, Franz
    2011 “Assessing Aptitude for Interpreting: The SynCloze Test.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.13.1.07poc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.1.07poc [Google Scholar]
60. Russo, Mariachiara, and Salvador Pippa
    2004 “Aptitude to Interpreting: Preliminary Results of a Testing Methodology Based on Paraphrase.” Meta (): –. 10.7202/009367ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/009367ar [Google Scholar]
61. Sandrelli, Annalisa, and Claudio Bendazzoli
    2005 “Lexical Patterns in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Preliminary Investigation of EPIC (European Parliament Interpreting Corpus).” Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference Series. https://iris.univr.it/retrieve/0f279c2a-3a57-4b52-8086-64c8523d27f1/2005_Sandrelli-Bendazzoli_CL.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
62. Szarkowska, Agnieska
    2011 “Text-to-Speech Audio Description: Towards Wider Availability of AD.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
    [Google Scholar]
63. Timarová, Sárka. and Heidi Salaets
    2011 “Learning Styles, Motivation and Cognitive Flexibility in Interpreter Training: Self-Selection and Aptitude.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.13.1.03tim
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.1.03tim [Google Scholar]
64. Tirkkonen-Condit, Sonja
    2004 “Unique Items — Over- or Under-Represented in Translated Language?” InTranslation Universals: Do they Exist?, edited byAnna Mauranen and Pekka Kujamäki, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.48.14tir
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.48.14tir [Google Scholar]
65. Walczak, Agnieszka, and Louise Fryer
    2018 “Vocal Delivery of Audio Description by Genre: Measuring Users’ Presence.” Perspectives (): –. 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1298634
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1298634 [Google Scholar]
66. Yamada, Masaru
    2014 “Can College Students be Post-Editors? An Investigation into Employing Language Learners in Machine Translation Plus Post-Editing.” Machine Translation (): –. 10.1007/s10590‑014‑9167‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10590-014-9167-7 [Google Scholar]
67. Yeh, Shu-Pai, and Min-Hua Liu
    2006 “A More Objective Approach to Interpretation Evaluation: Exploring the Use of Scoring Rubrics.” Compilation and Translation Review (): –.
    [Google Scholar]
68. Yenkimaleki, Mahmood, and Vincent J. van Heuven
    2016 “The Effect of Prosody Awareness Training on the Performance of Consecutive Interpretation by Farsi-English Interpreter Trainees: An Experimental Study.” Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies (): –. 10.1080/23306343.2016.1233930
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23306343.2016.1233930 [Google Scholar]
69. Yeung, Andy W. K.
    2017 “Do Neuroscience Journals Accept Replications? A Survey of Literature.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience: –. 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00468
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00468 [Google Scholar]
70. Yu, Wen-Ting, and Vincent J. van Heuven
    2017 “Predicting Judged Fluency of Consecutive Interpreting from Acoustic Measures: Potential for Automatic Assessment and Pedagogic Implications.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.19.1.03yu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.19.1.03yu [Google Scholar]
71. Alves, Fabio, and José Luiz Gonçalves
    2013 “Investigating the Conceptual-Procedural Distinction in the Translation Process: A Relevance-Theoretic Analysis of Micro and Macro Translation Units.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.25.1.09alv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.09alv [Google Scholar]
72. Ameri, Saeed, Masood Khoshsaligheh, and Ali Khazaee Farid
    2018 “The Reception of Persian Dubbing: A Survey on Preferences and Perception of Quality Standards in Iran.” Perspectives (): –. 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1359323
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1359323 [Google Scholar]
73. Araghian, Roya, and Behzad Ghonsooly
    2018 “The Relationship between Burnout and Personality: A Case of Iranian Translation Students.” Babel (): –. 10.1075/babel.00075.ara
    https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00075.ara [Google Scholar]
74. Bóna, Judit, and Mária Bakti
    2020 “The Effect of Cognitive Load on Temporal and Disfluency Patterns of Speech: Evidence from Consecutive Interpreting and Sight Translation.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.19041.bon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.19041.bon [Google Scholar]
75. Conde, Tomás
    2011 “Translation Evaluation on the Surface of Texts: A Preliminary Analysis.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
    [Google Scholar]
76. Deng, Weitian
    2020 “The Dual Effect of Speakers’ Silent Pauses on Fluent Simultaneous Interpreting: A Comparison Between Formal Speech and Spontaneous Speech.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2020.00014
    https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2020.00014 [Google Scholar]
77. Hale, Sandra, Jane Goodman-Delahunty, and Natalie Martschuk
    2019 “Interpreter Performance in Police Interviews: Differences between Trained Interpreters and Untrained Bilinguals.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer (): –. 10.1080/1750399X.2018.1541649
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2018.1541649 [Google Scholar]
78. Han, Chao, and Mehdi Riazi
    2017 “Investigating the Effects of Speech Rate and Accent on Simultaneous Interpretation: A Mixed-Methods Approach.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2017.18.2.4
    https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2017.18.2.4 [Google Scholar]
79. Han, Hyun-Hee, and Han-Nae Yu
    2020 “An Empirical Study of Temporal Variables and Their Correlations in Spoken and Sign Language Relay Interpreting.” Babel (): –. 10.1075/babel.00191.yu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00191.yu [Google Scholar]
80. Kruger, Haidee
    2016 “Fluency/Resistancy and Domestication/Foreignization: A Cognitive Perspective.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.28.1.01kru
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.28.1.01kru [Google Scholar]
81. Naranjo, Beatriz
    2019 “Immersed in the Source Text: The Role of Psychological Transportation in Literary Translation.” Babel (): –. 10.1075/babel.00091.nar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/babel.00091.nar [Google Scholar]
82. Rossetti, Alessandra, and Sharon O’Brien
    2019 “Helping the Helpers: Evaluating the Impact of a Controlled Language Checker on the Intralingual and Interlingual Translation Tasks Involving Volunteer Health Professionals.” Translation Studies (): –. 10.1080/14781700.2019.1689161
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2019.1689161 [Google Scholar]
83. Schaeffer, Moritz, Jean Nitzke, Anke Tardel, Katharina Oster, Silke Gutermuth, and Silvia Hansen-Schirra
    2019 “Eye-Tracking Revision Processes of Translation Students and Professional Translators.” Perspectives (): –. 10.1080/0907676X.2019.1597138
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2019.1597138 [Google Scholar]
84. Su, Wenchao, and Defeng Li
    2019 “Identifying Translation Problems in English-Chinese Sight Translation: An Eye-Tracking Experiment.” Translation and Interpreting Studies (): –. 10.1075/tis.00033.su
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.00033.su [Google Scholar]
85. Terryn, Ayla Rigouts, Isabelle S. Robert, Jim J. J. Ureel, Aline Remael, and Sabien Hanoulle
    2017 “Conceptualizing Translation Revision Competence: A Pilot Study on the Acquisition of the Knowledge about Revision and Strategic Subcompetences.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2017.18.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2017.18.1.1 [Google Scholar]
86. Tor-Carroggio, Irene
    2020 “T(ime) T(o) S(tart) Synthesising Audio Description in China? Results of a Reception Study.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
    [Google Scholar]
87. Walczak, Agnieszka, and Louise Fryer
    2018 “Vocal Delivery of Audio Description by Genre: Measuring Users’ Presence.” Perspectives (): –. 10.1080/0907676X.2017.1298634
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2017.1298634 [Google Scholar]
88. Yoo, Taeyoung, and Cheol Ja Jeong
    2017 “Consolidating the Professional Identity of Translators: The Role of Citizenship Behaviors.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.15001.yoo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.15001.yoo [Google Scholar]
89. Bernardini, Silvia, Adriano Ferraresi, and Maja Miličević
    2016 “From EPIC to EPTIC — Exploring Simplification in Interpreting and Translation from an Intermodal Perspective.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.28.1.03ber
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.28.1.03ber [Google Scholar]

90. This study is an explicit partial replication of Laviosa (1998a, 1998b) to examine lexical simplification in bidirectional interpreting and translation, using monolingual comparable and intermodal corpora.

91. Colina, Sonia
    2009 “Further Evidence for a Functionalist Approach to Translation Quality Evaluation.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.21.2.02col
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.21.2.02col [Google Scholar]

92. This study is an implicit partial replication of Colina (2008), based on a larger sample of raters of different languages (i.e., Spanish, Russian, and Chinese), to verify the effectiveness of a componential-functionalist approach to translation quality assessment.

93. Dam, Helle Vrønning
    2021 “From Controversy to Complexity: Replicating Research and Extending the Evidence on Language Choice in Note-Taking for Consecutive Interpreting.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.00062.dam
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00062.dam [Google Scholar]

94. This study is an explicit partial replication of Dam (2004) to investigate the language choice (i.e., interpreters’ A versus B language) in note-taking for consecutive interpreting, based on seven different tasks involving five different languages and both directions of interpreting (from and into A language).

95. Fernández-Torné, Anna, and Anna Matamala
    2015 “Text-to-Speech vs. Human Voiced Audio Descriptions: A Reception Study in Films Dubbed into Catalan.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
    [Google Scholar]

96. This study is an implicit conceptual replication of Kobayashi et al. (2010) and Szarkowska (2011) to evaluate visually impaired people’s reception of text-to-speech audio description, based on participants in Catalan and using refined measurement methods.

97. Ferreira, Aline
    2014 “Analyzing Recursiveness Patterns and Retrospective Protocols of Professional Translators in L1 and L2 Translation Tasks.” Translation and Interpreting Studies (): –. 10.1075/tis.9.1.06fer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.9.1.06fer [Google Scholar]

98. This study is an explicit partial replication of Buchweitz and Alves (2006) to investigate cognitive processing during translation, based on different source texts and topics.

99. Gonzalez Darriba, Patricia
    2019 “Self-Directed Motion in Spontaneous and Translated English: A Comparable Corpora Study.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2019.20.2.4
    https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2019.20.2.4 [Google Scholar]

100. This study is an implicit conceptual replication of Tirkkonen-Condit (2004) to verify the Unique Items Hypothesis by operationalizing self-directed motion expressions as dependent variables (i.e., manner-of-motion verbs and path-denoting satellites).

101. González Davies, Maria
     2014 “Towards a Plurilingual Development Paradigm: From Spontaneous to Informed Use of Translation in Additional Language Learning.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer (): –. 10.1080/1750399X.2014.908555
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2014.908555 [Google Scholar]

102. As the second stage of a three-stage research project, this study is an explicit conceptual “replication of the author’s initial study undertaken from 2008 to 2009,” as acknowledged by the author (2014, 16).

103. Han, Chao
     2016 “A Survey to Profile Conference Interpreting Practice in China.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.18.2.05han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.18.2.05han [Google Scholar]

104. As an implicit conceptual replication of Han (2015b), this study uses a different research method and recruits a larger sample to corroborate previous findings on various aspects of conference interpreting practice in China.

105. Han, Chao
     2021 “Assessing the Fidelity of Consecutive Interpreting: The Effects of Using Source Versus Target Text as the Reference Material.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.00058.han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00058.han [Google Scholar]

106. This study is an implicit conceptual replication of Yeh and Liu (2006) to examine how the use of source- versus target-language text as the reference material would affect raters’ fidelity assessment of English–Chinese consecutive interpreting.

107. Han, Chao, Sijia Chen, Rongbo Fu, and Qin Fan
     2020 “Modeling the Relationship Between Utterance Fluency and Raters’ Perceived Fluency of Consecutive Interpreting.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.00040.han
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00040.han [Google Scholar]

108. This study is an implicit partial replication of Han (2015a) and Yu and van Heuven (2017), which attempts to verify previous findings across both interpreting directions (i.e., English-to-Chinese and Chinese-to-English) and different rater types (i.e., novice and experienced raters).

109. Han, Chao, Bei Hu, Qin Fan, Jing Duan, and Xi Li
     2022 “Using Computerised Comparative Judgement to Assess Translation.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2022.00001
     https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2022.00001 [Google Scholar]

110. This study is an implicit partial replication of Han (2022) to evaluate the reliability and validity of comparative judgment in the assessment of English–Chinese written translation.

111. Jesse, Alexandra, Nick Vrignaud, Michael M. Cohen, and Dominic W. Massaro
     2000/01 “The Processing of Information from Multiple Sources in Simultaneous Interpreting.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.5.2.04jes
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.5.2.04jes [Google Scholar]

112. This study is an explicit partial replication, which consists of three within-study experiments. The authors conducted internal validation in which the second and the third experiments were carried out to replicate results from the first experiment, based on different groups of bilinguals.

113. Kajzer-Wietrzny, Marta
     2015 “Simplification in Interpreting and Translation.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2015.16.2.5
     https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2015.16.2.5 [Google Scholar]

114. This study is an explicit partial replication in which the author tried to “replicate the methodology” used in Laviosa (1998a) and Sandrelli and Bendazzoli (2005) to compare the simplification phenomenon across different language pairs (i.e., German, Dutch, French, and Spanish into English) and between translation modes (i.e., written vs oral).

115. Liu, Yubo, and Wei Zhang
     2022 “Exploring the Predictive Validity of an Interpreting Aptitude Test Battery: An Approximate Replication.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.00078.liu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00078.liu [Google Scholar]

116. This study is an explicit partial replication of Pöchhacker (2011), Bontempo and Napier (2011), and Timarová and Salaets (2011) to explore the predictive validity of three aptitude screening instruments for interpreting, based on a sample of interpreting students in China.

117. Martínez Vilinsky, Bárbara
     2012 “On the Lower Frequency of Occurrence of Spanish Verbal Periphrases in Translated Texts as Evidence for the Unique Items Hypothesis.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/Acr.13.2012.2.4
     https://doi.org/10.1556/Acr.13.2012.2.4 [Google Scholar]

118. This study is an implicit conceptual replication of Tirkkonen-Condit (2004) to test the Unique Items Hypothesis, based on a different language combination (i.e., English into Spanish) and focusing on different linguistic elements (i.e., verbal periphrases).

119. Olalla-Soler, Christian
     2020 “Practices and Attitudes Toward Replication in Empirical Translation and Interpreting Studies.” Target (): –. 10.1075/target.18159.ola
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.18159.ola [Google Scholar]

120. This study consists of three sub-studies to investigate scholarly practices and attitudes towards replication, with the second and third sub-studies representing conceptual replications of Makel, Plucker, and Hegarty (2012), and Yeung (2017), respectively, which is acknowledged by the author himself.

121. Perego, Elisa, Fabio Del Missier, and Sara Bottiroli
     2015 “Dubbing Versus Subtitling in Young and Older Adults: Cognitive and Evaluative Aspects.” Perspectives (): –. 10.1080/0907676X.2014.912343
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2014.912343 [Google Scholar]

122. This study consists of two sub-studies to examine cognitive and evaluative effects of viewing a dubbed versus a subtitled film, with the second sub-study representing an explicit partial replication of the first sub-study, based on different samples of participants.

123. Perego, Elisa, Monika Laskowska, Anna Matamala, Aline Remael, Isabelle Robert, Agnieszka Szarkowska, Anna Vilaro, and Sara Bottiroli
     2016 “Is Subtitling Equally Effective Everywhere? A First Cross-National Study on the Reception of Interlingually Subtitled Messages.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2016.17.2.4
     https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2016.17.2.4 [Google Scholar]

124. This study is an explicit partial replication of Perego, Missier, and Bottiroli (2015) to examine the role of familiarity with subtitling on viewers’ film reception, based on participants from different geographical locations (i.e., Italy, Spain, Poland, and Dutch-speaking Belgium).

125. Ruokonen, Minna
     2016 “Realistic but Not Pessimistic: Finnish Translation Students’ Perceptions of Translator Status.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
     [Google Scholar]

126. This study is an explicit partial replication of Dam and Zethsen (2011) to explore stakeholders’ perception of translator status, based on a different type of translator (i.e., student translators).

127. Russo, Mariachiara
     2014 “Testing Aptitude for Interpreting: The Predictive Value of Oral Paraphrasing, with Synonyms and Coherence as Assessment Parameters.” Interpreting (): –. 10.1075/intp.16.1.01rus
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.16.1.01rus [Google Scholar]

128. This study is an implicit partial replication of Russo and Pippa (2004), based on a larger sample of students with different language pairs, to test the relationship between paraphrasing performance and course outcome measures.

129. Tor-Carroggio, Irene
     2020 “T(ime) T(o) S(tart) Synthesising Audio Description in China? Results of a Reception Study.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
     [Google Scholar]

130. This study is an explicit conceptual replication of previous studies such as Fernández-Torné and Matamala (2015) and Walczak and Fryer (2017) to examine Chinese audience’s reception of text-to-speech versus human-voiced audio description.

131. Yamada, Masaru
     2019 “The Impact of Google Neural Machine Translation on Post-Editing by Student Translators.” The Journal of Specialised Translation: –.
     [Google Scholar]

132. This study is an explicit partial replication of Yamada (2014) to further investigate students’ post-editing performance using statistical machine translation versus neural machine translation.

133. Yenkimaleki, Mahmood, and Vincent J. van Heuven
     2019 “Prosody Instruction for Interpreter Trainees: Does Methodology Make a Difference? An Experimental Study.” Across Languages and Cultures (): –. 10.1556/084.2019.20.1.6
     https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2019.20.1.6 [Google Scholar]

134. This study is an implicit partial replication of Yenkimaleki and Van Heuven (2016) to explore the effectiveness of prosody training on students’ consecutive interpreting performance.