In:Research Methods in Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies
Edited by Ana María Rojo López and Ricardo Muñoz Martín
[Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 10] 2025
► pp. 157–182
Chapter 7Keylogging
Published online: 1 April 2025
https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.10.07mar
https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.10.07mar
Abstract
Keystroke logging, or keylogging, is a powerful research method for collecting unobtrusive, fine-grained data
on text production processes. In cognitive translation and interpreting studies (CTIS), keyloggers like Translog-II and Inputlog capture
the dynamics of translation behavior, including pauses, revisions, information searching, and typing patterns, which enrich language data
and timestamp it, down to the millisecond. Keylogging data enables researchers to infer underlying cognitive processes, compare translator
expertise levels, and assess task difficulty. This chapter provides an overview of keylogging research in CTIS, covering its conceptual
basis, key variables, ethical considerations, analytical methods, and limitations. It emphasizes the need for ecological validity,
standardized metrics, and thorough reporting in keylogging studies. Future applications may expand to multimodal translation,
collaborative workflows, and integration with sensor technologies.
Article outline
- 1.The method, and key concepts
- 1.1The state of the art in keylogging in CTIS
- 1.2Ethical issues in keylogging studies
- 2.Conceptual aspects
- 2.1Variables in keylogging
- 2.2Measurement and operationalization in keylogging
- 3.Implementation
- 3.1Research designs in keylogging
- 3.2Current popular CTIS research keyloggers
- 4.Closing remarks
- 4.1Challenges: How many participants are enough?
- 4.2Advantages and disadvantages of keylogging
Notes Further readings on keylogging References
References (107)
Feit, A. M., Weir, D., & Oulasvirta, A. (2016). How
we type: Movement strategies and performance in everyday typing. In CHI’16:
Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 4262–4273). ACM.
Lindgren, E., & Sullivan, K. (Eds.). (2019). Observing
writing: Insights from keystroke logging and handwriting. Brill.
Manchón Ruiz, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (Eds.). (2023). Research
methods in the study of L2 writing processes. John Benjamins.
Ahlsén, E., & Strömqvist, S. (1999). ScriptLog:
A tool for logging the writing process and its possible diagnostic
use. In F. Loncke, J. Clibbens, H. Arvidson, & L. Lloyd (Eds.), Augmentative
and alternative communication. New directions in research and
practice (pp. 144–149). Wiley.
Allen, L. K., Jacovina, M. E., Dascalu, M., Roscoe, R. D., Kent, K. M., Likens, A. D., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). {ENTER}
ing the Time Series {SPACE}: Uncovering the writing process through keystroke
analyses. In T. Barnes, M. Chi, & M. Feng (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 9th International Conference on Educational Data
Mining (pp. 22–29). Raleigh, NC. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]
Alves, F., & Couto Vale, D. (2017). On
drafting and revision in translation: A corpus linguistics oriented analysis of translation process
data. In S. Hansen-Schirra, S. Neumann, & O. Čulo (Eds.), Annotation,
exploitation and evaluation of parallel corpora. TC3
I (pp. 81–101). Language Science Press.
Alves, F., & Gonçalves, J. L. (2003). A
relevance theory approach to the investigation of inferential processes in
translation. In F. Alves (Ed.), Triangulating
translation: Perspectives in process oriented
research (pp. 3–24). John Benjamins.
Alves, F., Pagano, A. S., Neumann, S., Steiner, E., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2010). Translation
units and grammatical shifts: Towards an integration of product- and process-based translation
research. In G. M. Shreve & E. Angelone (Eds.), Translation
and
cognition (pp. 109–142). John Benjamins.
Alves, R. A., Castro, S. L., Sousa, L., & Strömqvist, S. (2007). Typing
skill and pause–execution cycles in written composition. In M. Torrance, L. Van Waes, & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Writing
and cognition: Research and
applications (pp. 55–65). Elsevier.
Baaijen, V. M., Galbraith, D., & de Glopper, K. (2012). Keystroke
analysis: Reflections on procedures and measures. Written
Communication, 29(3), 246–277.
Balling, L. W., & Hvelplund, K. T. (2015). Design
and statistics in quantitative translation (process) research. Translation
Spaces, 4(1), 169–186.
Bridwell, L., Sirc, G., Brooke, R. (1985). Revising
and computing: Case studies of student writers. In S. Freedman (Ed.,) The
acquisition of written
language (pp. 172–195). Ablex.
Calatrava Martínez, M., De Irala Estévez, J., Osorio de Rebellón, A., Benítez Sastoque, E. R., & Lopez del Burgo, C. (2022). Matched
and fully private? A new self-generated identification code for school-based cohort studies to increase perceived
anonymity. Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 82(3), 465–481.
Carl, M. (2012a). Translog-II:
A program for recording user activity data for empirical translation process research. Paper presented at the 8th international
conference on language resources and evaluation, LREC 2012, Istanbul, Turkey.
(2012b). The
CRITT TPR-DB 1.0: A database for empirical human translation process
research. In S. O’Brien, M. Simard, & L. Specia (Eds.), Workshop
on Post-Editing Technology and Practice, San Diego, CA. AMTA. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]
Carl, M., Bangalore, S. & Schaeffer, M. (2016). Introduction
and overview. In M. Carl, S. Bangalore, & M. Schaeffer (Eds.), New
directions in empirical translation process
research (pp. 3–12). Springer.
Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2014). Pauses
in spontaneous written communication: A keystroke logging study. Journal of Writing
Research, 6(1), 61–84.
Conijn, R., Cook, C., Van Zaanen, M., & Van Waes, L. (2022). Early
prediction of writing quality using keystroke logging. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence
in
Education, 32(4), 835–866.
Conijn, R., Roeser, J., & van Zaanen, M. (2019). Understanding
the keystroke log: The effect of writing task on keystroke features. Reading and
Writing, 32(9), 2353–2374.
Cuschieri, S., Grech, V., & Savona Ventura, C. (2018). WASP
(Write a Scientific Paper): How to write a scientific thesis. Early Human
Development, 127, 101–105.
Dhakal, V., Feit, A. M., Kristensson, P. O., & Oulasvirta, A. (2018). Observations
on typing from 136 million keystrokes. In CHI’18: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 1–12). ACM.
Dragsted, B. (2004). Segmentation
in translation and translation memory systems. An empirical investigation of cognitive segmentation and effects of integrating a TM
system into the translation process. Samfundslitteratur.
(2005). Segmentation
in translation: Differences across levels of expertise and
difficulty. Target, 17(1), 49–70.
Dragsted, B., & Carl, M. (2013). Towards
a classification of translation styles based on eye-tracking and key-logging data. Journal of Writing
Research, 5(1), 133–158.
Du, Z. (2024). Bridging
the gap. Exploring the cognitive impact of InterpretBank on Chinese interpreting trainees (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of Bologna.
Duin, A. H., & Bridwell, L. S. (1985). Looking
in-depth at writers: Computers as writing medium and research tool. In J. L. Collins & E. A. Sommers (Eds.), Writing
on-line: Using computers in the teaching of
writing (pp. 115–121). Boynton/Cook.
Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Massey, G. (2014). Cognitive
ergonomic issues in professional translation. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The
development of translation competence: Theories and methodologies from psycholinguistics and cognitive
science (pp. 58–86). Cambridge Scholars.
Enríquez Raído, V. & Cai, Y. (2023). Changes
in web search query behavior of English-to-Chinese translation
trainees. Ampersand, 11, 100137.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol
analysis: Verbal reports as data (rev. ed.). The MIT Press.
Galbraith, D., & Baaijen, V. M. (2019). Aligning
keystrokes with cognitive processes in writing. In E. Lindgren & K. Sullivan (Eds.) Observing
writing. Insights from keystroke logging and
handwriting (pp. 306–325). Brill.
Gergle, D., & Tan, D. S. (2014). Experimental
research in HCI. In J. S. Olson & W. A. Kellogg (Eds.), Ways
of knowing in
HCI (pp. 191–227). Springer.
Grabowski, J. (2008). The
internal structure of university students’ keyboard skills. Journal of Writing
Research, 1(1), 27–52.
Heilmann, A., & Neumann, S. (2016). Dynamic
pause assessment of keystroke logged data for the detection of complexity in translation and monolingual text
production. In D. Brunato, F. Dell’Orletta, G. Venturi, T. François, & P. Blache (Eds.), Proceedings
of the Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Linguistic
Complexity (pp. 98–103). ACL. Retrieved
on 6 November 2024 from [URL]
Hvelplund, K. T. (2011). Allocation
of cognitive resources in translation: An eye-tracking and key-logging stud. (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Copenhagen Business School.
Immonen, S. (2006). Translation
as a writing process: Pauses in translation versus monolingual text
production. Target, 18(2), 313–336.
(2011). Unravelling
the processing units of translation. Across Languages and
Cultures, 12(2), 235–257.
Immonen, S., & Mäkisalo, J. (2010). Pauses
reflecting the processing of syntactic units in monolingual text production and
translation. Hermes, 23(44), 45–61.
Jakobsen, A. L. (2003). Effects
of think aloud on translation speed, revision, and
segmentation. In Triangulating
translation (pp. 69–95). John Benjamins.
(2019). Segmentation
in translation: A look at expert behaviour. In D. Li, V. L. C. Lei, & Y. He (Eds.), Researching
cognitive processes of
translation (pp. 71–108). Springer.
Jakobsen, A. L., & Schou, L. 1999. Translog
documentation, Version 1.0. In G. Hansen (Ed.) Probing
the process in translation: Methods and
results (pp. 151–186). Samfundslitteratur.
Jankowska, A. (2021). Audio
describing films: A first look into the description
process. JoSTrans, 36, 26–52. [URL]
Jia, Y., & Sun, S. (2023). Man
or machine? Comparing the difficulty of human translation versus neural machine translation
post-editing. Perspectives, 31(5), 950–968.
Jiménez Crespo, M. A. & Casillas, J. (2021). Literal
is not always easier: Literal and default translation, cognitive effort and comparable
corpora. Translation, Cognition and
Behavior 4(1): 98-123.
Katerina, T., & Nicolaos, P. (2018). Mouse
behavioral patterns and keystroke dynamics in End-User Development: What can they tell us about users’ behavioral
attributes? Computers in Human
Behavior, 83, 288–305.
Kruger, H. (2016). What’s
happening when nothing’s happening? Combining eyetracking and keylogging to explore cognitive processing during pauses in translation
production. Across Languages and
Cultures, 17(1), 25–52.
Kumpulainen, M. (2015). On
the operationalisation of ‘pauses’ in translation process research. Translation &
Interpreting, 7(1), 47–48.
Lacruz, I., Shreve, G. M., & Angelone, E. 2012. Average
pause ratio as an indicator of cognitive effort in post-editing: A case
study. In S. O’Brien, M. Simard, & L. Specia (Eds.), Proceedings
of the Workshop on Post-editing Technology and Practice. San Diego, CA. AMTA. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]
Lam, K., Meijer, K., Loonstra, F., Coerver, E., Twose, J., Redeman, E., Moraal, B., Barkhof, F., de Groot, V., Uitdehaag, B., & Killestein, J. (2021). Real-world
keystroke dynamics are a potentially valid biomarker for clinical disability in multiple
sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis
Journal, 27(9), 1421–1431.
Lehka-Paul, O. (2020). Behavioural
indicators of translators’ decisional styles in a translation task: A longitudinal study. Yearbook of
the Poznań Linguistic
Meeting 6(1), 81–111.
Leijten, M. & Van Waes, L. (2006). Inputlog:
New perspectives on the logging of on-line writing. In K.P.H. Sullivan & E. Lindgren (Eds.) Computer
key-stroke logging and writing: Methods and
applications (pp. 73-94). Elsevier.
Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2013). Keystroke
logging in writing research: Using Inputlog to analyze and visualize writing processes. Written
Communication, 30(3), 358–392.
Leijten, M., Van Waes, L., & Van Horenbeeck, E. (2015). Analyzing
writing process data: A linguistic perspective. In G. Cislaru (Ed.), Writing(s)
at the
crossroads (pp. 277–302). John Benjamins.
Leppich, D., Bieber, C., Proschek, K., Harms, P., & Schubert, U. (2023). DUX:
A dataset of user interactions and user
emotions. I-Com, 22(2), 101–123.
Manchón Ruiz, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (2023). The
study of L2 writing processes: Lines and methods of inquiry. In R. M. Manchón Ruiz & J. Roca de Larios (Eds.). Research methods in the study of L2 writing
processes (pp. 6–31). John Benjamins.
Mellinger, C. D. (2023). Embedding,
extending, and distributing interpreter cognition with technology. In G. Corpas Pastor & B. Defrancq (Eds.), Interpreting
technologies — Current and future
trends (pp. 195–216). John Benjamins.
Mellinger, C., & Hanson, T. (2016). Quantitative
research methods in translation and interpreting studies. Routledge.
Muñoz Martín, Ricardo.
(2021). Situated cognition. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation
studies (Vol. 5, pp. 207–212). John Benjamins.
Muñoz Martín, R., & Apfelthaler, M. (2022). A
task segment framework to study keylogged translation processes. Translation &
Interpreting, 14(2), 8–31.
Muñoz Martín, R., & Cardona Guerra, J. M. (2019). Translating
in fits and starts: Pause thresholds and roles in the research of translation
processes. Perspectives, 27(4), 525–551.
Muñoz Martín, R., & Martín de León, C. (2018). Fascinatin’
rhythm — And pauses in translators’ cognitive
processes. Hermes, 57, 29–47.
Nitzke, J., & Gros, A. K. (2021) Preferential
changes in revision and post-editing. In M. Koponen, B. Mossop, I. Robert, & G. Scocchera (Eds.), Translation
revision and post-editing: Industry practices and cognitive
processes (pp. 21–34). Routledge.
O’Brien, S. (2006). Pauses
as indicators of cognitive effort in post-editing machine translation output. Across Languages and
Cultures, 7(1), 1–21.
Olalla Soler, C. (2023). Literal
vs. default translation. Challenging the constructs with middle Egyptian translation as an extreme case in
point. Sendebar, 34, 65–92.
Oliveira, E. A., Conijn, R., De Barba, P., & Tresize, K. (2020). Writing
analytics across essay tasks with different cognitive load demands. Paper presented at ASCILITE 2020.
Orrego Carmona, D., Dutka, L., & Szarkowska, A. (2018). Using
translation process research to explore the creation of subtitles: An eye-tracking study comparing professional and trainee
subtitlers. JoSTrans, 30, 150–180. [URL]
Pinet, S., Dubarry, A.-S., & Alario, F.-X. (2016). Response
retrieval and motor planning during typing. Brain and
Language, 159, 74–83.
Puerini, S. (2023). Text-production
tasks at the keyboard. Linguistic and behavioral contrasts. Translation, Cognition &
Behavior, 6(1), 29–59.
Risku, H. (2017). Ethnographies
of translation and situated cognition. In J. W. Schwieter & A. Ferreira (Eds.), The
handbook of translation and
cognition (pp. 290–310). John Wiley & Sons.
Risku, H., & Rogl, R. (2021). Translation
and situated, embodied, distributed, embedded and extended
cognition. In F. Alves & A. L. Jakobsen (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of translation and
cognition (pp. 478–499). Routledge.
Rojo López, A., Cifuentes Férez, P., & Ramos Caro, M. (2021). The
role of creativity on the translation of motion verbs: Data on the translation product and
process. Onomázein, 52, 99–126.
Rosenqvist, S. (2015). Developing
pause thresholds for keystroke logging analysis (Unpublished BA
thesis). University of Umea.
Sala-Bubaré, A., Castelló, M., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2021). Writing
processes as situated regulation processes: A context-based approach to doctoral writing. Journal of
Writing
Research 13(1), 299–328.
Schaeffer, M., Tardel, A., Hofmann, S., & Hansen-Schirra, S. (2019). Cognitive
effort and efficiency in translation revision. In E. Huertas Barros, S. Vandepitte, & E. Iglesias Fernández (Eds.), Quality assurance and assessment
practices in translation and
interpreting (pp. 226–243). IGI Global.
Schilperoord, J. (1996). The
distribution of pause time in written text production. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzjin (Eds.), Theories,
models and methodology in writing
research (pp. 21–35). Amsterdam University Press.
(2001). On
the cognitive status of pauses in discourse production. In T. Olive & C. M. Levy (Eds.), Contemporary
tools and techniques for studying
writing (pp. 61–90). Kluwer.
Schou, L, Dragsted, B., & Carl, M. 2009. Ten
years of Translog. In I. Mees, F. Alves, & S. Göpferich (Eds), Methodology,
technology and innovation in translation process
research (pp. 37–48). Samfundslitteratur.
Schrijver, I., Van Vaerenbergh, L., Leijten, M., & Van Waes, L. (2016). The
impact of writing training on transediting in translation, analyzed from a product and process
perspective. Perspectives, 24(2), 218–234.
Schrijver, I., Van Vaerenbergh, L., & Van Waes, L. (2012). An
exploratory study of transediting in students’ translation
processes. Hermes, 25(49), 99–117.
Serbina, T., Hintzen, S., Niemietz, P., & Neumann, S. (2017). Changes
of word class during translation — Insights from a combined analysis of corpus, keystroke logging and eye-tracking
data. In S. Hansen-Schirra, O. Czulo, & S. Hofmann (Eds.), Empirical
modelling of translation and
interpreting (pp. 177–208). Language Science Press.
Serbina, T., Niemietz, P., Fricke, M., Meisen, P. & Neumann. S. (2015). Part
of speech annotation of intermediate versions in the keystroke logged translation
corpus. In A. Meyers, I. Rehbein, & H. Zinsmeister (Eds.), Proceedings
of the 9th Linguistic Annotation
Workshop (pp. 102–111). Denver, CO. ACL. Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL].
Severinson Eklundh K. S., & Kollberg P. (1992). Translating
keystroke records into a general notation for the writing process. Department of Numerical Analysis and Computing Science, Royal Institute of Technology.
Shadman, R., Anu Wahab, A., Manno, M., Lukaszewski, M., Hou, D., & Hussain, F. (2023). Keystroke
dynamics: Concepts, techniques, and applications. arXiv e-prints.
Shi, Y., Wang, X., Zheng, K., & Cao, S. (2023). User
authentication method based on keystroke dynamics and mouse dynamics using HDA. Multimedia
Systems, 29(2), 653–668.
Sjørup, A. C. (2013). Cognitive
effort in metaphor translation: An eye-tracking and key-logging study (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Copenhagen Business School. [URL]
Song, D. X., Wagner, D., & Tian, X. (2001). Timing
analysis of keystrokes and timing attacks on SSH. In Proceedings of the 10th
USENIX Security
Symposium. Washington, DC.
Strömqvist, S., & Karlsson, H. (2002). ScriptLog
for Windows: User’s manual (technical report). Lund University and University College of Stavanger.
Sun, S., Li, T., & Zhou, X. (2020). Effects
of thinking aloud on cognitive effort in translation. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series–Themes in
Translation Studies, 19.
Teixeira, C. S. C., Moorkens, J., Turner, D., Vreeke, J., & Way, A. (2019). Creating
a multimodal translation tool and testing machine translation integration using touch and voice. Human
Brain Mapping, 45(2), Article e26617.
Thomas, P. A., & Preetha Mathew, K. (2023). A
broad review on non-intrusive active user authentication in biometrics. Journal of Ambient Intelligence
and Humanized
Computing, 14(1), 339–360.
Tsimperidis, I., & Arampatzis, A. (2020). The
keyboard knows about you: Revealing user characteristics via keystroke dynamics. International Journal
of
Technoethics 11(2), 34–51. Retrieved
on 6 November 2024 from [URL].
Usoof, H., Leblay, C., & Caporossi, G. (2020). GenoGraphiX-Log
version 2.0 user guide. Technical report. Les Cahiers du GERAD, G–2020–68.
Retrieved on 6 November 2024 from [URL]
Van Waes, L. (1992). The
influence of the computer on writing profiles. In H. Pander Maat & M. Steehouder (Eds.) Studies
of functional text
quality (pp. 173–186). Brill.
Van Waes, L., & Leijten, M. (2015). Fluency
in writing: A multidimensional perspective on writing fluency applied to L1 and L2. Computers and
Composition, 38, 79–95.
Van Waes, L., Leijten, M., Pauwaert, T., & Van Horenbeeck, E. (2019). A
multilingual copy task: Measuring typing and motor skills in writing with Inputlog. Journal of Open
Research
Software, 7(1:30), 1–8.
Van Waes, L., Leijten, M., Roeser, J., Olive, T., & Grabowski, J. (2021). Measuring
and assessing typing skills in writing research. Journal of Writing
Research, 13(1), 107–153.
Vieira, L. Nunes.
(2017). How do measures of cognitive effort relate to each other? A multivariate analysis of
post-editing process data. Machine
Translation, 30(1), 41–62.
Wang, L., & Sun, S. (2023). Dictating
translations with automatic speech recognition: Effects on translators’ performance. Frontiers in
Psychology 14, 1108898.
Wengelin, Å., Frid, J., Johansson, R., & Johansson, V. (2019). Combining
keystroke logging with other methods: Towards an experimental environment for writing process
research. In E. Lindgren & K. Sullivan (Eds.), Observing
writing (pp. 30–49). Brill.
Whyatt, B. (2018). Testing
indicators of translation expertise in an intralingual
task. Hermes, 57, 63–78.
Xiao, K., & Muñoz Martín, R. (2020). Cognitive
translation studies: Models and methods at the cutting edge. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series:
Themes in Translation Studies, 19, 1–24.
Yamada, M., T. Mizowaki, L. Zou, & M. Carl.
(2022). Trados-to-Translog-II: Adding gaze and qualitivity data to the CRITT
TPR-DB. In Proceedings of the 23rd annual Conference of the
EMTA (pp. 295–296). EAMT. Retrieved
on 6 November 2024 from [URL]
Yurek, L. A., Vasey, J., & Sullivan Havens, D. (2008). The
use of self-generated identification codes in longitudinal research. Evaluation
Review, 32(5), 435–452.
Zhang, H., & Torres Hostench, O. (2022). Training
in machine translation post-editing for foreign language students. Language Learning &
Technology, 26(1), 1–17. [URL]