Efficacy of screen recording in the other-revision of translations: episodic memory and event models

Article Sidebar

PDF
DOI: https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.7
Keywords:
Translation revisión, Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting, Screen recording, Episodic memory, Event segmentation theory

Main Article Content

Gregory M. Shreve
Erik Angelone
Isabel Lacruz

Abstract

In a 2011 study, Angelone compared the self-revision results of graduate German translation students. Participants documented their original translations using Integrated Problem and Decision Reporting (IPDR) logs (Gile 2004), think-aloud protocols and screen recordings. They then used this documentation to assist self-revision of their translations. Angelone found a significant improvement in error detection overall and in each of six discrete error categories when participants used screen recordings to assist their self-revision. We sought to partially replicate Angelone’s findings concerning the efficacy of screen recording in translation revision. Instead of focusing on self-revision, we studied other-revision and broadened our scope to examine the behavior of graduate students in both Spanish and German translation. We hypothesized that error analysis overall would show that screen recording would again prove to be a more efficacious process protocol in support of revision than IPDR logs, as was the case in Angelone’s study. We also hypothesized that we would replicate his findings for each of the six error categories. The results partially confirmed Angelone’s results: screen recordings were significantly more efficacious than IPDR logs in overall error mitigation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Shreve, G. M., Angelone, E., & Lacruz, I. (2015). Efficacy of screen recording in the other-revision of translations: episodic memory and event models. MonTI. Monographs in Translation and Interpreting, 225–245. https://doi.org/10.6035/MonTI.2014.ne1.7
Issue
2014: Special Issue 1. Minding translation / Con la traducción en mente
Section
Articles

The documents contained in these directories are included by the contributing authors as a means to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly and technical work on a non-commercial basis. It is understood that all persons copying this information will adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. These works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder.

References

Angelone, Erik. (2013) “The impact of process protocol self-analysis on errors in the translation product.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 8:2, pp. 253–271.

Cangiano, Gaston. (2011) Studying Episodic Access to Personal Digital Activity: Activity Trails Prototype. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego.

Cangiano, Gaston & James Hollan. (2009) “Capturing and restoring the context of everyday work: A case study at a law office.” Human Computer Interaction 10:5619, pp. 945–954.

Gile, Daniel. (2004) “Integrated problem and decision reporting as a translator training tool.” JoSTrans 2. Electronic version available at: http://www.jostrans.org/issue02/art_gile.php on 20 October 2012.

Ginsburg, Gerald & David Smith. (1993) “Exploration of the detectable structure of social episodes: the parsing of interaction specimens.” Ecological Psychology 5:3, pp. 195–233.

Kiraly, Donald C. (1995) Pathways to Translation: Pedagogy and Process. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.

Künzli, Alexander. (2007) “A study of the performance of ten profesional translators revising a legal text.” In: Gambier, Yves; Miriam Shlesinger & Radegundis Stolze (eds.) 2007. Doubts and Directions in Translation Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 115–126.

Massey, Gary; Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow & Andrea Hunziker Heeb. (2013) “Defining phases of the translation process: Revision as a case in point.” Conference paper presented at GAL 2 Sektionentagung, “Übersetzungs- und Dolmetschwissenschaft: Makrodefinitionen und Mikrodefinitionen.” RWTH Aachen, Germany, 19–20 September 2013.

Newston, Darren. (1976) “Foundations of attribution: The perception of ongoing behavior.” In: Harvey, John H.; William J. Ickes & Robert F. Kidd (eds.) 1976. New Directions in Attribution Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 223–248.

NEwston, Darren & Gretchen Engquist. (1976) “The perceptual organization of ongoing behavior.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 12:5, pp. 436–450.

Schwan, Stephan & Bärbel Garsoffky. (2004) “The cognitive representation of filmic event summaries.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 18:1, pp. 37–56.

Sellen, Abigail; Andrew Fogg; Mike Aitken; Steve Hodges; Carsten Rother & Ken Wood. (2007) “Do life-logging technologies support memory for the past? An experimental study using SenseCam.” In: Begole, B.; S. Payne; E. Churchill; R. St. Amant; D. Gilmore & M. Rosson (eds.) 2007. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, pp. 81–90.

Shreve, Gregory. (2006) “The deliberate practice: Translation and expertise.” Journal of Translation Studies 9:1, pp. 27–42.

Tulving, Endel & Donald Thomson. (1973) “Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory.” Psychological Review 80:5, pp. 352–373.

Zacks, Jeffrey. (2010) “How we organize our experience into events.” Psychological Science Agenda 24:4. Electronic version available at: http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2010/04/sci-brief.aspx on 22 October 2012.

Zacks, Jeffrey & Jesse Sargent. (2010) “Event perception: A theory and its application to clinical neuroscience.” In: Ross, Brian H (ed.) 2010. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 53. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 253–299.

Zacks, Jeffrey; Nicole Speer; Khena Swallow; Todd Braver & Jeremy Reynolds. (2007) “Event perception: A mind/brain perspective.” Psychological Bulletin 133:2, pp. 273–293.