1887
Volume 6, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2542-5277
  • E-ISSN: 2542-5285
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The cognitive demands associated with performing a task involve at least two dimensions: (1) the load dimension that is related to the assumed task difficulty and (2) the effort dimension that reflects the resources invested in a task. This study considers whether this distinction is actually relevant to translators and interpreters when they report load and effort and, if so, how the assumed psychological reality of these two dimensions is related to task performance. In this study, professional translators and interpreters performed naturalistic tasks with comparable stimuli, working from English into German. After each task, they were asked to rate their experienced load and effort as part of the NASA Task Load Index. Their performance was measured by analysing process and product indicators that correspond in interpreting and translation. Results indicate that while self-reported load and effort are highly correlated, their relationships to process or product measures appear to be more complex.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00073.gie
2023-03-14
2024-02-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alves, Fabio
    2007 ‘Cognitive Effort and Contextual Effect in Translation: A Relevance-Theoretic Approach’. Journal of Translation Studies10 (1): 57–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alves, Fabio, and José Luiz Gonçalves
    2013 ‘Investigating the Conceptual-Procedural Distinction in the Translation Process’. Target25 (1): 107–24. 10.1075/target.25.1.09alv
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.25.1.09alv [Google Scholar]
  3. Angell, James Rowland, and Helen Bradford Thompson
    1899 ‘A Study of the Relations between Certain Organic Processes and Consciousness.’ Psychological Review6 (1): 32–69. 10.1037/h0072367
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0072367 [Google Scholar]
  4. Angelone, Erik, Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow, and Gary Massey
    2016 ‘Cognitive Processes’. InResearching Translation and Interpreting, edited byClaudia V. Angelelli and Brian James Baer, 43–57. London: Routledge. www.tandfebooks.com/isbn/9781315707280
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Angelone, Erik, and Álvaro Marín García
    2022 ‘Reconceptualizing Breaks in Translation: Breaking Down or Breaking Through?Translation & Interpreting14(2), Art. 2. 10.12807/ti.114202.2022.a05
    https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.114202.2022.a05 [Google Scholar]
  6. APA American Psychological Association
    APA American Psychological Association 2023 ‘Cognitive Process’. APA Dictionary of Psychology. https://dictionary.apa.org/cognitive-process. Accessed20 January 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Barrouillet, Pierre, Sophie Bernardin, and Valérie Camos
    2004 ‘Time Constraints and Resource Sharing in Adults’ Working Memory Spans.’ Journal of Experimental Psychology: General133 (1): 83–100. 10.1037/0096‑3445.133.1.83
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.83 [Google Scholar]
  8. Barrouillet, Pierre, Sophie Bernardin, Sophie Portrat, Evie Vergauwe, and Valérie Camos
    2007 ‘Time and Cognitive Load in Working Memory.’ Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition33 (3): 570–85. 10.1037/0278‑7393.33.3.570
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.570 [Google Scholar]
  9. Boersma, Paul, and David Weenink
    2013Praat. Doing Phonetics by Computer (version 5.3.51). www.praat.org
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Chen, Sijia
    2017 ‘The Construct of Cognitive Load in Interpreting and Its Measurement’. Perspectives25 (4): 640–57. 10.1080/0907676X.2016.1278026
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2016.1278026 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chmiel, Agnieszka, Agnieszka Szarkowska, Danijel Koržinek, Agnieszka Lijewska, Łukasz Dutka, Łukasz Brocki, and Krzysztof Marasek
    2017 ‘Ear–Voice Span and Pauses in Intra- and Interlingual Respeaking: An Exploratory Study into Temporal Aspects of the Respeaking Process’. Applied Psycholinguistics38 (5): 1201–27. 10.1017/S0142716417000108
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716417000108 [Google Scholar]
  12. Davies, Mark
    2008 ‘Word Frequency Data’. The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/. Accessed1 March 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Díaz-Galaz, Stephanie, Presentación Padilla, and M. Teresa Bajo
    2015 ‘The Role of Advance Preparation in Simultaneous Interpreting: A Comparison of Professional Interpreters and Interpreting Students’. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting17 (1): 1–25. 10.1075/intp.17.1.01dia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.17.1.01dia [Google Scholar]
  14. Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, Michaela Albl-Mikasa, Katrin Andermatt, Andrea Hunziker Heeb, and Caroline Lehr
    2020 ‘Cognitive Load in Processing ELF: Translators, Interpreters, and Other Multilinguals’. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca9 (2): 217–38. 10.1515/jelf‑2020‑2039
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2020-2039 [Google Scholar]
  15. Fox, John
    2003 ‘Effect Displays in R for Generalised Linear Models’. Journal of Statistical Software8 (15): 27. 10.18637/jss.v008.i15
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v008.i15 [Google Scholar]
  16. Galy, Edith, Julie Paxion, and Catherine Berthelon
    2018 ‘Measuring Mental Workload with the NASA-TLX Needs to Examine Each Dimension Rather than Relying on the Global Score: An Example with Driving’. Ergonomics61 (4): 517–27. 10.1080/00140139.2017.1369583
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2017.1369583 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gieshoff, Anne Catherine
    2021 ‘Does It Help to See the Speaker’s Lip Movements? An Investigation of Cognitive Load and Mental Effort in Simultaneous Interpreting’. Translation, Cognition & Behavior4 (1): 1–25. 10.1075/tcb.00049.gie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00049.gie [Google Scholar]
  18. Gieshoff, Anne Catherine, and Michaela Albl-Mikasa
    2022 ‘Interpreting Accuracy Revisited: A Refined Approach to Interpreting Performance Analysis’. Perspectives. 10.1080/0907676X.2022.2088296
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2022.2088296 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gieshoff, Anne Catherine, Caroline Lehr, and Andrea Hunziker Heeb
    2021 ‘Stress, Cognitive, Emotional and Ergonomic Demands in Interpreting and Translation: A Review of Physiological Studies’. Cognitive Linguistic Studies8 (2): 404–39. 10.1075/cogls.00084.gie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00084.gie [Google Scholar]
  20. Gile, Daniel
    2009Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator Training: Revised Edition. 2nd ed.Vol.81. Benjamins Translation Library. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/btl.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.8 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2017 ‘Testing the Effort Models’ Tightrope Hypothesis in Simultaneous Interpreting – A Contribution’. HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business12 (23): 153. 10.7146/hjlcb.v12i23.25553
    https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v12i23.25553 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gile, Daniel, and Victoria Lei
    2021 ‘Translation, Effort and Cognition’. InThe Routledge Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited byFabio Alves and Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, 1st ed.Routledge Handbooks in Translation and Interpreting Studies, 263–78. New York: Taylor and Francis. 10.4324/9781315178127‑18
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315178127-18 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hart, Sandra G., and Lowell E. Staveland
    1988 ‘Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research’. InHuman Mental Workload, edited byPeter Hancock and Meshkati, 521: 139–83. Advances in Psychology. North Holland: Elsevier. 10.1016/S0166‑4115(08)62386‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hertzum, Morten
    2021 ‘Associations among Workload Dimensions, Performance, and Situational Characteristics: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Task Load Index’. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1–13. 10.1080/0144929X.2021.2000642
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2021.2000642 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hunziker Heeb, Andrea, Caroline Lehr, and Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
    2021 ‘Situated Translators: Cognitive Load and the Role of Emotions’. InAdvances in Cognitive Translation Studies, edited byRicardo Muñoz Martín, Sanjun Sun, and Defeng Li, 47–65. Singapore: Springer Singapore. 10.1007/978‑981‑16‑2070‑6_3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2070-6_3 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hvelplund, Kristian T.
    2017 ‘Translators’ Use of Digital Resources during Translation’. HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business561: 71–87. 10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97205
    https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.v0i56.97205 [Google Scholar]
  27. Jang, Hyesue, Ziyong Lin, and Cindy Lustig
    2020 ‘Losing Money and Motivation: Effects of Loss Incentives on Motivation and Metacognition in Younger and Older Adults’. Frontiers in Psychology111 (July): 1489. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01489
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01489 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kahneman, Daniel
    1973Attention and Effort. Prentice-Hall Series in Experimental Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 2013Thinking, Fast and Slow. 1st pbk. ed.New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Koehn, Philipp, and Christof Monz
    2006 ‘Manual and Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation between European Languages’. InProceedings of the Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation – StatMT ’06, 102. New York City, New York: Association for Computational Linguistics. 10.3115/1654650.1654666
    https://doi.org/10.3115/1654650.1654666 [Google Scholar]
  31. Krings, Hans Peter
    2001Repairing Texts: Empirical Investigations of Machine Translation Post-Editing Processes. Trans.Geoffrey S. Koby, Gregory M. Shreve, Katja Mischerikow, and Sarah Litzer. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kurz, Ingrid
    2002 ‘Conference Interpreting: Quality in the Ears of the User’. Meta46 (2): 394–409. 10.7202/003364ar
    https://doi.org/10.7202/003364ar [Google Scholar]
  33. Lacruz, Isabel
    2017 ‘Cognitive Effort in Translation, Editing, and Post-editing’. InThe Handbook of Translation and Cognition, edited byJohn W. Schwieter and Aline Ferreira, 1st ed., 386–401. Wiley. 10.1002/9781119241485.ch21
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119241485.ch21 [Google Scholar]
  34. Leijten, Mariëlle, and Luuk Van Waes
    2013 ‘Keystroke Logging in Writing Research: Using Inputlog to Analyze and Visualize Writing Processes’. Written Communication30 (3): 358–92. 10.1177/0741088313491692
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313491692 [Google Scholar]
  35. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo
    2012 ‘Just a Matter of Scope. Mental Load in Translation Process Research’. Translation Spaces1 (1): 169–88. 10.1075/ts.1.08mun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ts.1.08mun [Google Scholar]
  36. Muñoz Martín, Ricardo, and José M. Cardona Guerra
    2019 ‘Translating in Fits and Starts: Pause Thresholds and Roles in the Research of Translation Processes’. Perspectives, 27 (4): 525–551. 10.1080/0907676X.2018.1531897
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2018.1531897 [Google Scholar]
  37. Paas, Fred, Juhani E. Tuovinen, Huib Tabbers, and Pascal W. M. Van Gerven
    2003 ‘Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory’. Educational Psychologist38 (1): 63–71. 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8 [Google Scholar]
  38. Plevoets, Koen, and Bart Defrancq
    2018 ‘The Cognitive Load of Interpreters in the European Parliament: A Corpus-Based Study of Predictors for the Disfluency Uh(m)’. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting20 (1): 1–32. 10.1075/intp.00001.ple
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00001.ple [Google Scholar]
  39. Pym, Anthony
    2015 ‘Translating as Risk Management’. Journal of Pragmatics851 (August): 67–80. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  40. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2020R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (version 3.6.3). Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Seeber, Kilian G.
    2011 ‘Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting’. Interpreting13 (2): 176–204. 10.1075/intp.13.2.02see
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.13.2.02see [Google Scholar]
  42. 2015 ‘Cognitive Load in Simultaneous Interpreting: Measures and Methods’. InBenjamins Current Topics, edited byMaureen Ehrensberger-Dow, Susanne Göpferich, and Sharon O’Brien, 721:18–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/bct.72.03see
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.72.03see [Google Scholar]
  43. Setton, Robin
    1999Simultaneous Interpretation: A Cognitive-Pragmatic Analysis. Benjamins Translation Library 28. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/btl.28
    https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.28 [Google Scholar]
  44. Shenhav, Amitai, Sebastian Musslick, Falk Lieder, Wouter Kool, Thomas L. Griffiths, Jonathan D. Cohen, and Matthew M. Botvinick
    2017 ‘Toward a Rational and Mechanistic Account of Mental Effort’. Annual Review of Neuroscience40 (1): 99–124. 10.1146/annurev‑neuro‑072116‑031526
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-072116-031526 [Google Scholar]
  45. Sun, Sanjun
    2015 ‘Measuring Translation Difficulty: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations’. Across Languages and Cultures16 (1): 29–54. 10.1556/084.2015.16.1.2
    https://doi.org/10.1556/084.2015.16.1.2 [Google Scholar]
  46. Sun, Sanjun, and Gregory M. Shreve
    2014 ‘Measuring Translation Difficulty: An Empirical Study’. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies26 (1): 98–127. 10.1075/target.26.1.04sun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/target.26.1.04sun [Google Scholar]
  47. Sweller, J.
    2011 ‘Cognitive Load Theory’. Psychology of Learning and Motivation – Advances in Research and Theory551: 37–76. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑387691‑1.00002‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8 [Google Scholar]
  48. Sweller, John
    2010 ‘Element Interactivity and Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane Cognitive Load’. Educational Psychology Review22 (2): 123–38. 10.1007/s10648‑010‑9128‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5 [Google Scholar]
  49. Wickens, Christopher D.
    2008 ‘Multiple Resources and Mental Workload’. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society50 (3): 449–55. 10.1518/001872008X288394
    https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288394 [Google Scholar]
  50. Wickham, Hadley
    2016Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Use R!Cham: Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑24277‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4 [Google Scholar]
  51. Wickham, Hadley, Mara Averick, Jennifer Bryan, Winston Chang, Lucy McGowan, Romain François, Garrett Grolemund,
    2019 ‘Welcome to the Tidyverse’. Journal of Open Source Software4 (43): 1686. 10.21105/joss.01686
    https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686 [Google Scholar]
  52. Young, Mark S., Karel A. Brookhuis, Christopher D. Wickens, and Peter A. Hancock
    2015 ‘State of Science: Mental Workload in Ergonomics’. Ergonomics58 (1): 1–17. 10.1080/00140139.2014.956151
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.956151 [Google Scholar]
  53. Young, Mark S., and Neville Anthony Stanton
    2004 ‘Mental Workload’. InHandbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics Methods, edited byNeville Anthony Stanton, Alan Hedge, Karel Brookhuis, Eduardo Salas, and Hal W. Hendrick, 0 ed.CRC Press. 10.1201/9780203489925.ch39
    https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203489925.ch39 [Google Scholar]
  54. Yu, Wenting, and Vincent J. van Heuven
    2017 ‘Predicting Judged Fluency of Consecutive Interpreting from Acoustic Measures: Potential for Automatic Assessment and Pedagogic Implications’. Interpreting19 (1): 47–68. 10.1075/intp.19.1.03yu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.19.1.03yu [Google Scholar]
  55. Zwischenberger, Cornelia
    2010 ‘Quality Criteria in Simultaneous Interpreting: An International vs. a National View’. The Interpreters’ Newsletter151: 127–42. hdl.handle.net/10077/4754
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00073.gie
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/tcb.00073.gie
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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