1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Translation, Cognition & Behavior
  4. Volume 5, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 5, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2542-5277
  • E-ISSN: 2542-5285
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Studies about working memory (WM) and interpreting have used a variety of methods and results are often conflicting. There is therefore the need to analyse the cognitive tasks which have been used so far to assess their effectiveness in detecting WM performance differences. This paper presents the findings of a meta-analysis that compares the results of interpreters and interpreting students (study group) to the results of non-interpreters (control group) in four cognitive tasks (reading span, n-back task, listening span and dual tasks). Interpreters show a significant WM advantage of medium size over non-interpreters in tasks based on verbal stimuli, but not in tasks based on non-verbal stimuli. In addition, differences are larger when there is a wider gap in interpreting expertise between the two groups.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi
2022-07-01
2024-12-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Assink, Mark, Claudia E. van der Put, Machteld Hoeve, Sanne L. A. de Vries, Geert Jan J. M. Stams, and Frans J. Oort
    2015 ‘Risk Factors for Persistent Delinquent Behavior among Juveniles: A Meta-Analytic Review’. Clinical Psychology Review42 (December): 47–61. 10.1016/j.cpr.2015.08.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2015.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  2. Assink, Mark, and Carlijn J. M. Wibbelink
    2016 ‘Fitting Three-Level Meta-Analytic Models in R: A Step-by-Step Tutorial’. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology12 (3): 154–74. 10.20982/tqmp.12.3.p154
     https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.12.3.p154 [Google Scholar]
  3. Babcock, Laura, Mariagrazia Capizzi, Sandra Arbula, and Antonino Vallesi
    2017 ‘Short-Term Memory Improvement After Simultaneous Interpretation Training’. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement1 (3): 254–67. 10.1007/s41465‑017‑0011‑x
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-017-0011-x [Google Scholar]
  4. Babcock, Laura, and Antonino Vallesi
    2017 ‘Are Simultaneous Interpreters Expert Bilinguals, Unique Bilinguals, or Both?’ Bilingualism: Language and Cognition20 (2): 403–17. 10.1017/S1366728915000735
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000735 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cai, Rendong, Yanping Dong, Nan Zhao, and Jiexuan Lin
    2015 ‘Factors Contributing to Individual Differences in the Development of Consecutive Interpreting Competence for Beginner Student Interpreters’. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer9 (1): 104–20. 10.1080/1750399X.2015.1016279
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2015.1016279 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cheung, Mike W.-L.
    2014 ‘Modeling Dependent Effect Sizes with Three-Level Meta-Analyses: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach’. Psychological Methods19 (2): 211–29. 10.1037/a0032968
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032968 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chincotta, Dino, and Geoffrey Underwood
    1998 ‘Simultaneous Interpreters and the Effect of Concurrent Articulation on Immediate Memory: A Bilingual Digit Span Study’. Interpreting3 (1): 1–20. 10.1075/intp.3.1.01chi
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.3.1.01chi [Google Scholar]
  8. Chmiel, Agnieszka
    2018 ‘In Search of the Working Memory Advantage in Conference Interpreting – Training, Experience and Task Effects’. The International Journal of Bilingualism; London22 (3): 371–84. 10.1177/1367006916681082
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006916681082 [Google Scholar]
  9. Christoffels, Ingrid K., Annette M. B. de Groot, and Judith F. Kroll
    2006 ‘Memory and Language Skills in Simultaneous Interpreters: The Role of Expertise and Language Proficiency’. Journal of Memory and Language54 (3): 324–45. 10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Version 6.2
    Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Version 6.2 2021 6.2. https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current
  11. Cohen, Jacob
    1977 Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooper, Harris, Larry V. Hedges, and Jeffrey C. Valentine
    2009 The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis. Russell Sage Foundation.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Desmet, Bart, Mieke Vandierendonck, and Bart Defrancq
    2018 ‘Simultaneous Interpretation of Numbers and the Impact of Technological Support’. InInterpreting and Technology, edited byClaudio Fantinuoli, 13–27. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Diamantopoulos, Adamantios, and Judy A. Siguaw
    2000 ‘Assessment of Model Fit’. InIntroducing LISREL: A Guide for the Uninitiated, 82–100. London, UNITED KINGDOM: SAGE Publications. ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/unibo/detail.action?docID=1191061. 10.4135/9781849209359.n7
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209359.n7 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dong, Yanping, and Rendong Cai
    2015 ‘Working Memory in Interpreting: A Commentary on Theoretical Models’. InWorking Memory in Second Language Acquisition and Processing, edited byZhisheng (Edward) Wen, Borges Mailce Mota, and Arthur McNeill, 63–84. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783093595‑008
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093595-008 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dong, Yanping, and Yuhua Liu
    2016 ‘Classes in Translating and Interpreting Produce Differential Gains in Switching and Updating’. Frontiers in Psychology7 (August). 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01297
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01297 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dong, Yanping, Yuhua Liu, and Rendong Cai
    2018 ‘How Does Consecutive Interpreting Training Influence Working Memory: A Longitudinal Study of Potential Links Between the Two’. Frontiers in Psychology9: 875. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00875
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00875 [Google Scholar]
  18. Duval, Sue, and Richard Tweedie
    2000 ‘Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel-Plot-Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis’. Biometrics56 (2): 455–63. 10.1111/j.0006‑341X.2000.00455.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x [Google Scholar]
  19. Franco Aixelá, Javier
    2001 ‘BITRA (Bibliography of Interpreting and Translation). Open-Access Database.’ dti.ua.es/en/bitra/introduction.html
  20. García, Adolfo M.
    2014 ‘The Interpreter Advantage Hypothesis: Preliminary Data Patterns and Empirically Motivated Questions’. Translation and Interpreting Studies. The Journal of the American Translation and Interpreting Studies Association9 (2): 219–38. 10.1075/tis.9.2.04gar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.9.2.04gar [Google Scholar]
  21. Gile, Daniel
    2009 Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/btl.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2021 ‘CIRIN Bulletin’ 2021 https://cirin-gile.fr/
  23. Grundy, John G., and Kalinka Timmer
    2017 ‘Bilingualism and Working Memory Capacity: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis’. Second Language Research33 (3): 325–40. 10.1177/0267658316678286
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658316678286 [Google Scholar]
  24. Harrer, Mathias, Pim Cuijpers, Toshi A. Furukawa, and David D. Ebert
    2021 Doing Meta-Analysis with R: A Hands-On Guide. CRC Press. 10.1201/9781003107347
     https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003107347 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hedges, Larry V.
    1981 ‘Distribution Theory for Glass’s Estimator of Effect Size and Related Estimators’. Journal of Educational Statistics6 (2): 107–28. 10.3102/10769986006002107
     https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986006002107 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hunter, John E., and Frank L. Schmidt
    1990 Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. 2000 ‘Fixed Effects vs. Random Effects Meta-Analysis Models: Implications for Cumulative Research Knowledge’. International Journal of Selection and Assessment8 (4): 275–92. 10.1111/1468‑2389.00156
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00156 [Google Scholar]
  28. Injoque-Ricle, Irene, Juan Pablo Barreyro, Jesica Formoso, and Virginia I. Jaichenco
    2015 ‘Expertise, Working Memory and Articulatory Suppression Effect: Their Relation with Simultaneous Interpreting Performance’. Advances in Cognitive Psychology11 (2): 56–63. 10.5709/acp‑0171‑1
     https://doi.org/10.5709/acp-0171-1 [Google Scholar]
  29. Jin, Ya-shyuan
    2010 ‘Is Working Memory Working in Consecutive Interpreting?’ The University of Edinburgh. https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/4451
  30. Kelley, Ken, and Kristopher J. Preacher
    2012 ‘On Effect Size’. Psychological Methods17 (2): 137–152. 10.1037/a0028086
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028086 [Google Scholar]
  31. Köpke, Barbara, and Jean-Luc Nespoulous
    2006 ‘Working Memory Performance in Expert and Novice Interpreters’. Interpreting8 (1): 1–23. 10.1075/intp.8.1.02kop
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.8.1.02kop [Google Scholar]
  32. Lambert, Sylvie
    2004 ‘Shared Attention during Sight Translation, Sight Interpretation and Simultaneous Interpretation’. Meta : Journal Des Traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal49 (2): 294–306. 10.7202/009352ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/009352ar [Google Scholar]
  33. Liu, Minhua, Diane L. Schallert, and Patrick J. Carroll
    2004 ‘Working Memory and Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting’. Interpreting6 (1): 19–42. 10.1075/intp.6.1.04liu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.6.1.04liu [Google Scholar]
  34. Logie, Robert, Valérie Camos, and Nelson Cowan
    eds. 2021 Working Memory – State of the Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. McKenzie, Joanne E., and Sue E. Brennan
    2019 ‘Synthesizing and Presenting Findings Using Other Methods’. InCochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 321–47. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 10.1002/9781119536604.ch12
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119536604.ch12 [Google Scholar]
  36. Mellinger, Christopher D., and Thomas A. Hanson
    2019 ‘Meta-Analyses of Simultaneous Interpreting and Working Memory’. Interpreting21 (2): 165–95. 10.1075/intp.00026.mel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00026.mel [Google Scholar]
  37. 2020 ‘Meta-Analysis and Replication in Interpreting Studies’. Interpreting22 (1): 140–49. 10.1075/intp.00037.mel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00037.mel [Google Scholar]
  38. Morales, Julia, Francisca Padilla, Carlos J. Gómez-Ariza, and M. Teresa Bajo
    2015 ‘Simultaneous Interpretation Selectively Influences Working Memory and Attentional Networks’. Acta Psychologica155 (February): 82–91. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.12.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  39. Moser-Mercer, Barbara
    2000 ‘Simultaneous Interpreting: Cognitive Potential and Limitations’. Interpreting5 (2): 83–94. 10.1075/intp.5.2.03mos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.5.2.03mos [Google Scholar]
  40. Nour, Soudabeh, Esli Struys, and Helene Stengers
    2020a ‘Adaptive Control in Interpreters: Assessing the Impact of Training and Experience on Working Memory’. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition23 (4): 772–79. 10.1017/S1366728920000127
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728920000127 [Google Scholar]
  41. Nour, Soudabeh, Esli Struys, Evy Woumans, Ily Hollebeke, and Hélène Stengers
    2020b ‘An Interpreter Advantage in Executive Functions?: A Systematic Review’. Interpreting22 (2): 163–86. 10.1075/intp.00045.nou
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00045.nou [Google Scholar]
  42. Olalla-Soler, Christian
    2020 ‘Practices and Attitudes toward Replication in Empirical Translation and Interpreting Studies’. Target: International Journal of Translation Studies32 (1): 3–36. 10.1075/target.18159.ola
     https://doi.org/10.1075/target.18159.ola [Google Scholar]
  43. Page, Matthew J., Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy C. Hoffmann, Cynthia D. Mulrow, Larissa Shamseer,
    2021 ‘The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews’. BMJ372 (March): n71. 10.1136/bmj.n71
     https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 [Google Scholar]
  44. Park, Denise C., Gary Lautenschlager, Trey Hedden, Natalie S. Davidson, Anderson D. Smith, and Pamela K. Smith
    2002 ‘Models of Visuospatial and Verbal Memory across the Adult Life Span’. Psychology and Aging17 (2): 299–320. 10.1037/0882‑7974.17.2.299
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.17.2.299 [Google Scholar]
  45. Pollet, Thomas
    2021 ‘Meta-Analysis Course (in R)’ 2021 tvpollet.github.io/Meta-analysis_course
  46. Raftery, Adrian E.
    1995 ‘Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research’. Sociological Methodology25 (January): 111–63. 10.2307/271063
     https://doi.org/10.2307/271063 [Google Scholar]
  47. Rosiers, Alexandra, Evy Woumans, Wouter Duyck, and June Eyckmans
    2019 ‘Investigating the Presumed Cognitive Advantage of Aspiring Interpreters’. Interpreting21 (1). 10.1075/intp.00022.ros
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00022.ros [Google Scholar]
  48. Rothstein, Hannah R., Alexander J. Sutton, and Michael Borenstein
    2005 Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis : Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments. john Wiley & Sons. ezproxy.unibo.it/login?url=search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05251a&AN=at.UBO2140726&lang=it&site=eds-live&scope=site. 10.1002/0470870168
     https://doi.org/10.1002/0470870168 [Google Scholar]
  49. RStudio, Team
    2021 RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. Boston: PBC. https://rstudio.com/.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Schmidt, Frank L., In-Sue Oh, and Theodore L. Hayes
    2009 ‘Fixed- versus Random-Effects Models in Meta-Analysis: Model Properties and an Empirical Comparison of Differences in Results’. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology62 (1): 97–128. 10.1348/000711007X255327
     https://doi.org/10.1348/000711007X255327 [Google Scholar]
  51. Signorelli, Teresa M., Henk J. Haarmann, and Loraine K. Obler
    2011 ‘Working Memory in Simultaneous Interpreters: Effects of Task and Age’. International Journal of Bilingualism16 (2): 198–212. 10.1177/1367006911403200
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403200 [Google Scholar]
  52. Stavrakaki, Stavroula, Kalliopi Megari, Mary H. Kosmidis, Maria Apostolidou, and Eleni Takou
    2012 ‘Working Memory and Verbal Fluency in Simultaneous Interpreters’. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology34 (6): 624–33. 10.1080/13803395.2012.667068
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2012.667068 [Google Scholar]
  53. Timarová, Šárka, Ivana Čeňková, Reine Meylaerts, Erik Hertog, Arnaud Szmalec, and Wouter Duyck
    2014 ‘Simultaneous Interpreting and Working Memory Executive Control’. Interpreting16 (2): 139–68. 10.1075/intp.16.2.01tim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.16.2.01tim [Google Scholar]
  54. 2015 ‘Simultaneous Interpreting and Working Memory Capacity’. InPsycholinguistic and Cognitive Inquiries into Translation and Interpreting, edited byAline Ferreira and John W. Schwieter, 115:101–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/btl.115.05tim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.115.05tim [Google Scholar]
  55. Tzou, Yeh-Zu, Zohreh R. Eslami, Hsin-Chin Chen, and Jyotsna Vaid
    2012 ‘Effect of Language Proficiency and Degree of Formal Training in Simultaneous Interpreting on Working Memory and Interpreting Performance: Evidence from Mandarin–English Speakers’. International Journal of Bilingualism16 (2): 213–27. 10.1177/1367006911403197
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006911403197 [Google Scholar]
  56. Ünlü, Elena Antonova, and Çiğdem Sağın Şimşek
    2018 ‘Testing the Impact of Formal Interpreting Training on Working Memory Capacity: Evidence from Turkish–English Students–Interpreters’. Lingua209 (July): 78–88. 10.1016/j.lingua.2018.04.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2018.04.003 [Google Scholar]
  57. Van der Linden, Lize, Eowyn Van de Putte, Evy Woumans, Wouter Duyck, and Arnaud Szmalec
    2018 ‘Does Extreme Language Control Training Improve Cognitive Control? A Comparison of Professional Interpreters, L2 Teachers and Monolinguals’. Frontiers in Psychology9. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01998
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01998 [Google Scholar]
  58. Viechtbauer, Wolfgang
    2005 ‘Bias and Efficiency of Meta-Analytic Variance Estimators in the Random-Effects Model’. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics30 (3): 261–93. 10.3102/10769986030003261
     https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986030003261 [Google Scholar]
  59. 2010 ‘Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the Metafor Package’. Journal of Statistical Software36 (August): 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v036.i03
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03 [Google Scholar]
  60. Wen, Hao, and Yanping Dong
    2019 ‘How Does Interpreting Experience Enhance Working Memory and Short-Term Memory: A Meta-Analysis’. Journal of Cognitive Psychology31 (8): 769–84. 10.1080/20445911.2019.1674857
     https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2019.1674857 [Google Scholar]
  61. Yudes, Carolina, Pedro Macizo, and Teresa Bajo
    2011 ‘The Influence of Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting on Non-Verbal Executive Processes’. Frontiers in Psychology2. 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00309
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00309 [Google Scholar]
  62. Yudes, Carolina, Pedro Macizo, Luis Morales, and M. Teresa Bajo
    2013 ‘Comprehension and Error Monitoring in Simultaneous Interpreters’. Applied Psycholinguistics34 (5): 1039–57. 10.1017/S0142716412000112
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716412000112 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi
Loading
Working memory tasks in interpreting studies
Translation, Cognition & Behavior 5, 50 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi
/content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi
/content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): cognitive tasks; interpreting; literature review; meta-analysis; methodology; working memory

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error