Cover not available

Article published In: Translation, Cognition & Behavior
Vol. 5:2 (2022) ► pp.221–249

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required
Thematic section

Employing retrospective process tracing in an international exploratory study

ORCiD logo with link | University of Silesia in Katowice
 | Century College
Published online: 21 October 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00067.gum
Abstract
This paper reports on a RPT study which employed an adapted version of the three-stage method used by Herring, Rachel E. 2018. ‘I could only think about what I was doing, and that was a lot to think about’: online self-regulation in dialogue interpreting. PhD dissertation, University of Geneva. [URL]. The same stimulus and method were employed with two distinct populations (experienced medical interpreters in the USA and student interpreters in Poland), with the aim of refining RPT methods and exploring the feasibility of their use in multi-researcher, multi-site studies. The authors discuss the process of developing and carrying out a study design and procedure for use by two researchers across two sites and with two populations, critically address the effectiveness of the use of the method & procedure by two researchers, and discuss recommendations for future studies employing similar designs and methods. The paper also presents preliminary analysis of the RPT data gathered as part of the study and suggests avenues for further research.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Retrospective process tracing
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Overview
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3Institutional review and data management
    • 3.4Material
    • 3.5Procedure
      • 3.5.1Pilot
      • 3.5.2Data collection
    • 3.6Researchers’ introspective log
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Inter-researcher consistency in study procedure
    • 4.2Quantitative analysis of retrospection data
    • 4.3Preliminary qualitative analysis of retrospection data
      • 4.3.1Inter-group differences in foci of RPT
      • 4.3.2Process tracing vs evaluation/reflection
  • 5.Conclusion
    • 5.1Summary
    • 5.2Method-related comments & recommendations
    • 5.3Directions for further research
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (33)
References
Allen, Katharine, Victor Sosa, Angélica Isidro & Marjory A. Bancroft. 2018. The indigenous interpreter: a training manual for indigenous language interpreting. Salinas, CA: Natividad Medical Foundation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Angelelli, Claudia V. 2017. Anchoring dialogue interpreting in principles of teaching and learning. In Letizia Cirillo & Natacha Niemants, eds. Teaching dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 30–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Chia-chien & Diane L. Schallert, D. 2007. The impact of directionality on Chinese/English simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting 9 (2): 137–176. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Díaz, Stephanie. (2022). Methodological strategies for using stimulated recall in interpreting research. Onomázein (X): 55–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Englund Dimitrova, Birgitta & Elisabet Tiselius. 2009. Exploring retrospection as a research method for studying the translation process and the interpreting process. In Inger M. Mees, Fabio Alves, & Susanne Göpferich, eds. Methodology, technology and innovation in translation process research. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur, pp. 109–134.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Retrospection in interpreting and translation: Explaining the process? MonTI Special Issue – Minding Translation 11: 177–200. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Cognitive aspects of community interpreting: Toward a process model. In Ricardo Muñoz Martín, ed. Reembedding translation process research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 195–214. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. Anders & Herbert A. Simon. 1993. Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data. Second edition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gass, Susan M. & Alison Mackey. 2000. Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gumul, Ewa. 2017. Explicitation in simultaneous interpreting: A study into explicitating behaviour of trainee interpreters. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020a. Retrospective protocols in simultaneous interpreting – testing the effect of retrieval cues. Linguistica Antverpiensia. New Series – Themes in Translation Studies 191: 152–171. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2020b. O metodzie badawczej zapożyczonej z psychologii, czyli jak zaprojektować i przeprowadzić badanie za pomocą metody protokołów retrospektywnych w tłumaczeniu symultanicznym [On a research method borrowed from psychology. How to design and conduct research using the method of retrospective protocols in simultaneous interpreting]. Między oryginałem a przekładem 4 (50): 31–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. Interpreters who explicitate talk more. On the relationship between explicitating styles and retrospective styles in simultaneous interpreting. Perspectives. Published as online first 28 Dec 2021. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henderson, Lyn & Julie I. Tallman. 2006. Stimulated recall and mental models: tools for teaching and learning computer information literacy. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press, Inc.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herring, Rachel E. 2018. ‘I could only think about what I was doing, and that was a lot to think about’: online self-regulation in dialogue interpreting. PhD dissertation, University of Geneva. [URL]
2019. A lot to think about. Online monitoring in dialogue interpreting. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 2 (2): 283–304. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herring, Rachel E. & Elisabet Tiselius. 2020. Making the most of retrospective process tracing in dialogue interpreting research. FITISPOS International Journal 7 (1): 53–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015a. Retrospective protocols. In Franz Pöchhacker, ed. Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies. London: Routledge, pp. 351–353.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015b. Discourse comprehension in simultaneous interpreting: The role of expertise and information redundancy. In Aline Ferreira & John W. Schwieter, eds. Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 67–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ivanova, Adelina. 1999. Discourse processing during simultaneous interpreting: an expertise approach. PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge, UK.
Johnson, Julie E. 2016. Effect of mindfulness training on interpretation exam performances in graduate students in interpreting. PhD dissertation, University of San Francisco. [URL]
Korpal, Paweł. 2021. Stress and emotion in conference interpreting. In Michaela Albl-Mikasa & Elisabet Tiselius, eds. The Routledge handbook of conference interpreting. London: Routledge, pp. 401–413. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mead, Peter. 2017. Ideas for use of notes and other visual prompts in dialogue interpreting classes. In Letizia Cirillo & Natacha Niemants, eds. Teaching dialogue interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 102–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mikkelson, Holly. 2014. Evolution of public service interpreter training in the U.S. FITISPos International Journal 11: 9–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prada Prada, Carmen E. 2019. Estrategias metacognitivas de regulación empleadas por intérpretes en formación y su relación con las manifestaciones de la ansiedad [Metacognitive regulation strategies employed by trainee interpreters and their relationship with signs of anxiety]. PhD dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Manizales, Colombia. [URL]
Russell, Debra & Betsy Winston. 2014. Tapping into the interpreting process: using participant reports to inform the interpreting process in educational settings. Translating and Interpreting 6 (1): 102–127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Socarrás Estrada, Denis and Katharine Allen. 2015. Interpreting Protocols and Skills. In Marjory A. Bancroft, ed., The community interpreter®: an international textbook. Columbia, MD: Culture & Language Press, pp. 115–190.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schweda Nicholson, Nancy. 1990/2008. Consecutive note-taking for community interpretation. In David Bowen & Margareta Bowen, (eds.) Interpreting. yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 136–145. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiselius, Elisabet & Michaela Albl-Mikasa. 2019. Introduction: Cognitive processes in dialogue interpreting. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 2 (2): 233–239. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vik-Tuovinen, Gun-Viol. 2002. Retrospection as a method of studying the process of simultaneous interpreting. In Giuliana Garzone & Maurizio Viezzi, eds. Interpreting in the 21st century: challenges and opportunities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 63–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Gumul, Ewa & Jessica Pérez-Luzardo Díaz
2025. Explicitation and cognitive load in sight interpreting/translation (SiT): a study into explicitating behaviour of English-Spanish trainee interpreters. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue