Article published In: Interpreting
Vol. 20:1 (2018) ► pp.63–101
Using rating scales to assess interpretation
Practices, problems and prospects
Published online: 26 April 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00003.han
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00003.han
Abstract
Over the past decade, interpretation assessment has played an increasingly important role in interpreter education, professional certification, and interpreting research. The time-honored assessment method is based on analysis of (para)linguistic features of interpretation (including such items as omissions, substitutions, un/filled pauses and self-corrections). Recently, use of descriptor-based rating scales to assess interpretation has emerged as a viable alternative (e.g., (2009). Using a rubric to assess translation ability: Defining the construct. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–47. ; (2015). Investigating rater severity/leniency in interpreter performance testing: A multifaceted Rasch measurement approach. Interpreting 17 (2), 255–283. , (2016). Investigating score dependability in English/Chinese interpreter certification performance testing: A generalizability theory approach. Language Assessment Quarterly 13 (3), 186–201. ; Lee, J. (2008). Rating scales for interpreting performance assessment. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (2), 165–184. ; Tiselius, E. (2009). Revisiting Carroll’s scales. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 95–121. ), arguably providing a basis for reliable, valid and practical assessments. However, little work has been done in interpreting studies to ascertain the assumed benefits of this emerging assessment practice. Based on 17 international peer-reviewed journals over the last twelve years (2004–2015), and other related publications (e.g., scholarly books, reports, documents), this article provides an overview of practices in scale-based interpretation assessment, focusing on four major aspects: (a) rating scales; (b) raters; (c) rating procedures; (d) reporting of assessment outcomes. Problem areas and possible emerging trends in interpretation assessment are examined, identifying a number of future research needs.
Keywords: interpretation assessment, rating scales, reliability, validity
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Sources for the literature review
- 3.Rater-mediated, scale-based interpretation assessment: A synthetic review
- 3.1Rating scales
- 3.1.1Scale categories
- 3.1.2Scale bands
- 3.1.3Scalar descriptors
- 3.1.4Scale types
- 3.2Raters
- 3.2.1Rater characteristics
- 3.2.2The number of raters involved
- 3.2.3Rater training
- 3.3Rating procedures
- 3.3.1Real-time versus post-hoc rating
- 3.3.2Randomization of interpretation samples to be rated
- 3.3.3Group versus independent listening
- 3.3.4Use of external materials as references
- 3.3.5Rating on single versus multiple dimensions for each listening
- 3.3.6Decision-making processes
- 3.4Reporting of assessment outcomes
- 3.1Rating scales
- 4.Potential issues: Problem areas in assessment practices
- 4.1Rating scales
- 4.2Raters
- 4.3Rating procedures
- 4.4Reporting of assessment outcomes
- 5.Prospects: Identifying research needs
- 6.Conclusion
- Acknowledgement
- Notes
References
References (136)
ALTA Language Services (2007). Study of California’s court interpreter certification and registration testing. [URL] (accessed 10 June 2015).
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Angelelli, C. V. & Jacobson, H. E. (Eds.) (2009). Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies: A call for dialogue between research and practice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Angelelli, C. V. (2007). Assessing medical interpreters: The language and interpreting testing project. The Translator 13 (1), 63–82.
(2009). Using a rubric to assess translation ability: Defining the construct. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–47.
Arjona-Tseng, E. (1993). A psychometric approach to the selection of translation and interpreting students in Taiwan. Perspectives 1 (1), 91–104.
Arocha, I. S. & Joyce, L. (2013). Patient safety, professionalization, and reimbursement as primary drivers for national medical interpreter certification in the United States. Translation & Interpreting 5 (1), 127–142.
Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F. (2004). Statistical analyses for language assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Barik, H. C. (1973). Simultaneous interpretation: Temporal and quantitative data. Language and Speech 16 (3), 237–270.
Barkaoui, K. (2007). Rating scale impact on EFL essay marking: A mixed-method study. Assessing Writing 121, 86–107.
(2010). Variability in ESL essay rating processes: The role of rating scale and rater experience. Language Assessment Quarterly 7 (1), 54–74.
Beeby, A. (2000). Evaluating the development of translation competence. In C. Schäffner & B. Adab (Eds.), Developing translation competence. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 185–198.
Bond, T. G. & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Bontempo, K. & Napier, J. (2009). Getting it right from the start: Program admission testing of signed language interpreters. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 247–295.
Bontempo, K. & B. Hutchinson. (2011). Striving for an ‘A’ grade: A case study in performance management of interpreters. International Journal of Interpreter Education 31, 56–71.
Bühler, H. (1986). Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Multilingua 5 (4), 231–235.
Campbell, S. & Hale, S. (2003). Translation and interpreting assessment in the context of educational measurement. In G. Anderman & M. Rogers (Eds.), Translation today: Trends and perspectives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 205–224.
Carroll, J. B. (1966). An experiment in evaluating the quality of translations. Mechanical Translation and Computational Linguistics 9 (3–4), 55–66.
CCHI (2011). Technical report on the development and pilot testing of the CCHI examinations. Washington, DC: Certification Commission for Healthcare Interpreters. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
(2012). Technical report on the development and pilot testing of the Certified Healthcare Interpreter™ (CHI™) examination for Arabic and Mandarin. Washington, DC: Certification Commission for Healthcare Interpreters. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
Chen, J. (2009). Authenticity in accreditation tests for interpreters in China. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 3 (2), 257–273.
Cheung, A. K. -F. (2007). The effectiveness of summary training in consecutive interpreting (CI) delivery. Forum 5 (2), 1–23.
Choi, J. Y. (2006). Metacognitive evaluation method in consecutive interpretation for novice learners. Meta 51 (2), 273–283.
Clifford, A. (2001). Discourse theory and performance-based assessment: Two tools for professional interpreting. Meta 46 (2), 365–378.
(2005). Putting the exam to the test: Psychometric validation and interpreter certification. Interpreting 7 (1), 97–131.
Dragsted, B. & Hansen, I. G. (2009). Exploring translation and interpreting hybrids: The case of sight translation. Meta 54 (3), 588–604.
East, M. & Young, D. (2007). Scoring L2 writing samples: Exploring the relative effectiveness of two different diagnostic methods. New Zealand Studies in Applied Linguistics 13 (1), 1–21.
Engelhard, G. (1994). Examining rater errors in the assessment of written composition with a many-faceted Rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement 31 (2), 93–112.
(1996). Evaluating rater accuracy in performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement 33 (1), 56–70.
Feng, J. Z. (2005). 论口译测试的规范化. [Towards the standardization of interpretation testing]. 外语研究, 891, 54–58.
Feuerle, L. (2013). Testing interpreters: Developing, administering, and scoring court interpreter certification exams. Translation & Interpreting 5 (1), 80–93.
Floros, G. (2013). Evaluating assessment practices at the MCI in Cyprus. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 145–162.
Fulcher, G. (1996). Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. Language Testing 13 (2), 208–238.
Fulcher, G., Davidson, F. & Kemp, J. (2011). Effective rating scale development for speaking tests: Performance Decision Trees. Language Testing 28 (1), 5–29.
Garant, M. (2009). A case for holistic assessment. AFinLA-e Soveltavan kielitieteen tutkimuksia 11, 5–17.
Gile, D. (1999). Variability in the perception of fidelity in simultaneous interpretation. Hermes 221, 51–79.
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1967). Segmentation of input in simultaneous interpretation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 11, 127–140.
Goulden, N. R. (1992). Theory and vocabulary for communication assessments. Communication Education 41 (3), 258–269.
Grbić, N. (2008). Constructing interpreting quality. Interpreting 10 (2), 232–257.
Hale, S. B. & Ozolins, U. (2014). Monolingual short courses for language-specific accreditation: Can they work? A Sydney experience. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 8 (2), 1–23.
Hale, S., Garcia, I., Hlavac, J., Kim, M., Lai, M., Turner, B. & Slatyer, H. (2012). Development of a conceptual overview for a new model for NAATI standards, testing and assessment. Sydney, Australia. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
Hamidi, M. & Pöchhacker, F. (2007). Simultaneous consecutive interpreting: A new technique put to the test. Meta 52 (2), 276–289.
Hlavac, J. (2013). A cross-national overview of translator and interpreter certification procedures. Translation & Interpreting 51, 32–65.
Han, C. (2014). Measuring rater variability in interpreter performance testing: Using classical test theory, G theory and Rasch measurement. Paper presented at the Biennial Conference of the Association for Language Testing and Assessment of Australia and New Zealand at the University of Queensland, 27–29 November 2014.
(2015). Investigating rater severity/leniency in interpreter performance testing: A multifaceted Rasch measurement approach. Interpreting 17 (2), 255–283.
(2016). Investigating score dependability in English/Chinese interpreter certification performance testing: A generalizability theory approach. Language Assessment Quarterly 13 (3), 186–201.
Han, C., & Slatyer, H. (2016). Test validation in interpreter certification performance testing: An argument-based approach. Interpreting 18 (2), 231–258.
Huang, M. (2005). 谈口译资格认证考试的规范化设计. [Toward a more standardized large-scale accreditation test for interpreters]. 中国翻译 26 (6), 62–65.
ILR (Interagency Language Roundtable) (2015). ILR skill level descriptions for interpretation performance. [URL] (accessed 1 July 2015).
IoL (2010). Diploma in Public Service Interpreting: Handbook for candidates. London, UK. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
Iwashita, N. & Grove, E. (2003). A comparison of analytic and holistic scales in the context of a specific purpose speaking test. Prospect 18 (3), 25–35.
Jacobson, H. E. (2009). Moving beyond words in assessing mediated interaction. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 49–70.
Jamieson, J. & Poonpon, K. (2013). Developing analytic rating guides for TOEFL iBT® integrated speaking tasks. [URL] (accessed 12 June 2015).
Kelly, N. (2007). Interpreter certification programs in the U.S.: Where are we headed? The ATA Chronicle 36 (1), 31–39.
Knoch, U. (2009). Diagnostic writing assessment: The development and validation of a rating scale. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
(2011). Rating scales for diagnostic assessment of writing: What should they look like and where should the criteria come from? Assessing Writing 16 (2), 81–96.
Lee, J. (2008). Rating scales for interpreting performance assessment. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (2), 165–184.
Lee, S. -B. (2015). Developing an analytic scale for assessing undergraduate students’ consecutive interpreting performances. Interpreting 17 (2), 226–254.
Lee, Y. -H. (2005). Self-assessment as an autonomous learning tool in an interpretation classroom. Meta 50 (4).
Lim, H. -O. (2006). A comparison of curricula of graduate schools of interpretation and translation in Korea. Meta 51 (2), 215–228.
Lin, I. I., Chang, F. A., & Kuo, F. (2013). The impact of non-native accented English on rendition accuracy in simultaneous interpreting. Translation & Interpreting 5 (2), 30–44.
Liu, M. (2013). Design and analysis of Taiwan’s interpretation certification examination. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 163–178.
Liu, M., Chang, C. -C. & Wu, S. -C. (2008). Interpretation evaluation practices: Comparison of eleven schools in Taiwan, China, Britain, and the USA. Compilation and Translation Review 1 (1), 1–42.
Llewellyn, J. P. (1981). Simultaneous interpreting. In J. K. Woll & M. Deuchar (Eds.), Perspectives on British Sign Language & Deafness. London: Croom Helm, 89–104.
Lu, M., Liu, C. & Gong, X. F. (2007). 全国翻译专业资格(水平)考试英语口译试题命制一致性研究报告. [How to maintain consistency in CATTI’s interpretation tests: A research report]. 中国翻译, 51, 57–61.
Lunz, M. E. & Stahl, J. A. (1990). Judge consistency and severity across grading periods. Evaluation and the Health Professions 13 (4), 425–444.
Lynch, B. K. & McNamara, T. F. (1998). Using G-theory and many-facet Rasch measurement in the development of performance assessments of the ESL speaking skills of immigrants. Language Testing 15 (2), 158–180.
Matthews, G. & Ardemagni, E. J. (2013). Judicial interpretation education in U.S. colleges and universities. Translation and Interpreting Studies 8 (1), 73–93.
McAlester, G. (2000). The evaluation of translation into a foreign language. In C. Schäffner & B. Adab (Eds.), Developing translation competence. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 229–241.
McDermid, C. (2014). Cohesion in English to ASL simultaneous interpreting. Translation & Interpreting 6 (1), 76–101.
McNamara, T. F. & Adams, R. J. (1991). Exploring rater behavior with Rasch techniques. [URL] (accessed 20 March 2015).
Mead, P. (2005). Methodological issues in the study of interpreters’ fluency. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 131, 39–63.
Meuleman, C. & Van Besien, F. (2009). Coping with extreme speech conditions in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting 11 (1), 20–34.
Mikkelson, H. (2013). Universities and Interpreter Certification. Translation & Interpreting 5 (1), 66–78.
Moreno, M., Otero-Sabogai, R. & Newman, J. (2007). Assessing dual-role staff-interpreter linguistic competency in an integrated healthcare system. Journal of General Internal Medicine 22 (Suppl 2), 331–335.
Myford, C. M. & Wolfe, E. W. (2003). Detecting and measuring rater effects using many-facet Rasch measurement: Part I. Journal of Applied Measurement 4 (4), 386–422.
Napier, J. (2004). Sign language interpreter training, testing, and accreditation: An international comparison. American Annals of the Deaf 149 (4), 350–359.
National Center for State Courts (2013). Federal Court Interpreter Certification Examination for Spanish/English: Examinee handbook. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
Office of China Accreditation Tests for Translators and Interpreters. (2005). 二级口译英语同声传译类考试大纲. 外文出版社. [Syllabus of CATTI Level-two Simultaneous Interpreting Test]. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press.
Pellatt, V., Griffiths, K. & Wu, S. -C. (Eds.). (2010). Teaching and testing interpreting and translating. Bern: Peter Lang.
Peng, K. -C. (2006). The development of coherence and quality of performance in conference interpreter training. PhD Dissertation, University of Leeds.
Petronio, K. & Hale, K. (2009). One interpreter education program, two sites: A comparison of factors and outcomes. International Journal of Interpreter Education 11, 46–61.
Pio, S. (2003). The relation between ST delivery rate and quality in simultaneous interpretation. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 121, 69–100.
Pöchhacker, F. (2001). Quality assessment in conference and community interpreting. Meta 46 (2), 410–425.
(2007). “Going simul?” Technology-assisted consecutive interpreting. Forum 5 (2), 101–124.
(2011) Researching interpreting: Approaches to inquiry. In B. Nicodemus & L. Swabey (Eds.). Advances in interpreting research, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 5–25.
Pradas Macías, M. (2006). Probing quality criteria in simultaneous interpreting: The role of silent pauses in fluency. Interpreting 8 (1), 25–43.
PSI Services LLC (2010). Development and validation of oral and written examinations for medical interpreter certification: Technical report. Burbank, CA. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
(2013). Development and validation of oral examinations for medical interpreter certification: Mandarin, Russian, Cantonese, Korean, and Vietnamese forms. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
Rennert, S. (2010). The impact of fluency on the subjective assessment of interpreting quality. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 151, 101–115.
Ribas, M. A. (2010). Formative assessment in the interpreting classroom: Using the portfolio with students beginning simultaneous interpreting. Current Trends in Translation Teaching and Learning 31, 97–131.
Roat, C. E. (2006). Certification of health care interpreters in the United States: A primer, a status report and considerations for national certification. Los Angeles, CA. [URL] (accessed 22 May 2015).
Roels, B. (2013). Certification of social interpreters in Flanders, Belgium: Assessment and politics. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 179–197.
Rosiers, A., Eyckmans, J. & Bauwens, D. (2011). A story of attitudes and aptitudes? Investigating individual difference variables within the context of interpreting. Interpreting 13 (1), 53–69.
Rovira-Esteva, S. & Orero, P. (2011). A contrastive analysis of the main benchmarking tools for research assessment in translation and interpreting: The Spanish approach. Perspectives 19 (3), 233–251.
Russell, D. & Malcolm, K. (2009). Assessing ASL-English interpreters: The Canadian model of national certification. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 331–376.
Russo, M. (2011). Aptitude testing over the years. Interpreting 13 (1), 5–30.
Sawaki, Y. (2007). Construct validation of analytic rating scales in a speaking assessment: Reporting a score profile and a composite. Language Testing 24 (3), 355–390.
Sawyer, D. B. (2004). Fundamental aspects of interpreter education: Curriculum and assessment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schjoldager, A. (1995). Assessment of simultaneous interpreting. In C. Dollerup & V. Appel (Eds.), Teaching translation and interpreting 3: New horizons. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 187–195.
Setton, R. & Motta, M. (2007). Syntacrobatics: Quality and reformulation in simultaneous-with-text. Interpreting 9 (2), 199–230.
Shinjwa, K. (2004). Exploration into perceived quality of simultaneous interpretation. Forum 2 (1), 71–90.
Skaaden, H. (2013). Assessing interpreter aptitude in a variety of languages. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 35–50.
Skyba, K. (2014). Translators and interpreters certification in Australia, Canada, the USA and Ukraine: Comparative analysis. Comparative Professional Pedagogy 4 (3), 58–64.
Stenzl, C. (1983). Simultaneous interpretation: Groundwork towards a comprehensive model. MA thesis, University of London.
Strong, M. & Rudser, S. F. (1985). An assessment instrument for sign language interpreters. Sign Language Studies 491, 343–362.
Timarová, Š. & Ungoed-Thomas, H. (2008). Admission testing for interpreting courses. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (1), 29–46.
Timarová, Š., Čeňková, I., Meylaerts, R., Hertog, E., Szmalec, A. & Duyck, W. (2014). Simultaneous interpreting and working memory executive control. Interpreting 16 (2), 139–168.
Timarová, Š. & Ungoed-Thomas, H. (2009). The predictive validity of admissions tests for conference interpreting courses in Europe: A case study. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 225–245.
Tiselius, E. (2009). Revisiting Carroll’s scales. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 95–121.
Tsagari, D. & van Deemter, R. (Eds.) (2013). Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Turner, B., Lai, M. & Huang, N. (2010). Error deduction and descriptors – a comparison of two methods of translation test assessment. Translation & Interpreting 2 (1), 11–23.
Upshur, J. & Turner, C. E. (1995). Constructing rating scales for second language tests. ELT Journal 49 (1), 3–12.
Vermeiren, H., Gucht, J. V. & De Bontridder, L. (2009). Standards as critical success factors in assessments: Certifying social interpreters in Flanders, Belgium. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 291–330.
Wallace, M. (2013). Rethinking bifurcated testing models in the court interpreter certification process. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 67–84.
Wang, B. H. (2007). 口译能力评估和译员能力评估 – 口译的客观评估模式初探. [From interpreting competence to interpreter competence – a tentative model for objective assessment of interpreting]. 外语界 31, 44–50.
(2011). 口译能力的评估模式及测试设计再探 – 以全国英语口译大赛为例. [Exploration of the assessment model and test design of interpreting competence]. 外语界 11, 66–71.
Wang, J. -H., Napier, J., Goswell, D. & Carmichael, A. (2015). The design and application of rubrics to assess signed language interpreting performance, The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 9 (1), 83–103.
Wang, M. W. & Stanley, J. C. (1970). Differential weighting: A review of methods and empirical studies. Review of Educational Research 41, 663–705.
Wigglesworth, G. (1993). Exploring bias analysis as a tool for improving rater consistency in assessing oral interaction. Language Testing 10 (3), 305–319.
Wu, J., Liu, M. & Liao, C. (2013). Analytic scoring in interpretation test: Construct validity and the halo effect. In H. -H. Liao, T. -E. Kao & Y. Lin (Eds.), The making of a translator: Multiple perspectives. Taipei: Bookman, 277–292.
Wu, S. C. (2010). Assessing simultaneous interpreting: A study on test reliability and examiners’ assessment behavior. PhD thesis, Newcastle University.
(2013). How do we assess students in the interpreting examinations? In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 15–33.
Xi, X. -M. & Mollaun, P. (2006). Investigating the utility of analytic scoring for the TOEFL Academic Speaking Test (TAST). [URL] (accessed 15 June 2015).
Yan, J. X., Pan, J. & Wang, H. -H. (2010). Learner factors, self-perceived language ability and interpreting learning: An Investigation of Hong Kong tertiary interpreting classes. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 4 (2), 173–196.
Yan, J. X., Pan, J., Wu, H. & Wang, Y. (2013). Mapping interpreting studies: The state of the field based on a database of nine major translation and interpreting journals (2000–2010). Perspectives 21 (3), 446–73.
Yeh, S. -P., & Liu, M. (2006). 口譯評分客觀化初探:採用量表的可能性 [A more objective approach to interpretation evaluation: Exploring the use of scoring rubrics]. 國立編譯館館刊 34 (4), 57–78.
Youdelman, M. (2013). The development of certification for healthcare interpreters in the United States. Translation & Interpreting 5 (1), 114–126.
Zanotti, M. (2011). Authentic and valid assessment: Assessing the performance of public service interpreters. Investigation in University Teaching and Learning 71, 99–105.
Zhao, N. & Dong, Y. P. (2013). 基于多面Rasch模型的交替传译测试效度验证. [Validation of a consecutive interpreting test based on multi-faceted Rasch model]. 解放军外国语学院学报 36 (1), 86–90.
Zheng, B. -H. & Xiang, X. (2014). The impact of cultural background knowledge in the processing of metaphorical expressions: An empirical study of English-Chinese sight translation. Translation and Interpreting Studies 9 (1), 5–24.
Cited by (22)
Cited by 22 other publications
Fan, Jiashun, Pingping Hu & Zhuxuan Zhao
Han, Chao, Mengting Jiang & Qionglu Chen
Huang, Yujie, Andrew K F Cheung, Kanglong Liu & Han Xu
Chen, Sijia & Jan-Louis Kruger
Guo, Wei, Xun Guo, Junkang Huang & Sha Tian
Han, Chao, Binghan Zheng, Mingqing Xie & Shirong Chen
Liu, Yiguang & Junying Liang
Lu, Xiaolei & Chao Han
2023. Automatic assessment of spoken-language interpreting based on machine-translation evaluation metrics. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:1 ► pp. 109 ff.
Melicherčíková, Miroslava & Soňa Hodáková
Song, Shuxian & Dechao Li
Han, Chao & Xiaoyan Xiao
Han, Chao & Xiaolei Lu
Han, Chao & Xiaolei Lu
Han, Chao, Rui Xiao & Wei Su
2021. Assessing the fidelity of consecutive interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 23:2 ► pp. 245 ff.
Han, Chao, Sijia Chen, Rongbo Fu & Qin Fan
2020. Modeling the relationship between utterance fluency and raters’ perceived fluency of consecutive
interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 22:2 ► pp. 211 ff.
Wang, Weiwei, Yi Xu, Binhua Wang & Lei Mu
이지은, Choi, Hyo-eun & You-jin Lee
Han, Chao
Han, Chao
Han, Chao
Han, Chao
2022. Assessing spoken-language interpreting. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 24:1 ► pp. 59 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
