Part of
Eye Tracking and Multidisciplinary Studies on Translation
Edited by Callum Walker and Federico M. Federici
[Benjamins Translation Library 143] 2018
► pp. 3353
Carl, Michael, Srinivas Bangalore, and Moritz Schaeffer
(eds) 2016New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research: Exploring the CRITT TPR-DB. New Frontiers in Translation Studies. Cham: Springer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daems, Joke, Michael Carl, Sonia Vandepitte, Robert Hartsuiker, and Lieve Macken
2016 “The Effectiveness of Consulting External Resources During Translation and Post-editing of General Text Types.” In New Directions in Empirical Translation Process Research: Exploring the CRITT TPR-DB, ed. by Michael Carl, Srinivas Bangalore, and Moritz Schaeffer, 111–133. New Frontiers in Translation Studies. Cham: Springer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dragsted, Barbara
2012 “Indicators of Difficulty in Translation – Correlating Product and Process Data.” Across Languages and Cultures 13 (1): 81–98.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Duchowski, Andrew T.
2009Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Duchowski, Andrew T., Krzysztof Krejtz, Izabela Krejtz, Cezary Biele, Anna Niedzielska, Peter Kiefer, Martin Raubal, and Ioannis Giannopoulos
2018 “The Index of Pupillary Activity.” In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference, ed. by Regan Mandryk, Mark Hancock, Mark Perry, and Anna Cox, 1–13. New York, NY, USA: ACM.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen
2014 “Challenges of Translation Process Research at the Workplace.” In MonTI Special Issue – Minding Translation, ed. by Ricardo Muñoz Martín, 355–383. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante.Google Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Sharon O’Brien
2015 “Ergonomics of the Translation Workplace: Potential for Cognitive Friction.” Translation Spaces 4 (1): 98–118.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hess, Eckhard H., and James M. Polt
1964 “Pupil Size in Relation to Mental Activity During Simple Problem-Solving.” Science 143 (3611): 1190–1192.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Holmqvist, Kenneth, Richard Dewhurst, Halszka Jarodzka, Marcus Nyström, Richard Andersson, and Joost C. van de Weijer
2015Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hvelplund, Kristian Tangsaard
2014 “Eye Tracking and the Translation Process: Reflections on the Analysis and Interpretation of Eye-Tracking Data.” In MonTI Special Issue – Minding Translation, ed. by Ricardo Muñoz Martín, 201–223. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante.Google Scholar
Iqbal, Shamsi T., Piotr D. Adamczyk, Xianjun S. Zheng, and Brian P. Bailey
2005 “Towards an Index of Opportunity.” In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems – CHI ‘05, ed. by Gerrit van der Veer, and Carolyn Gale, 311–320. New York, USA: ACM Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Just, Marcel A., and Patricia A. Carpenter
1980 “A Theory of Reading: From Eye Fixations to Comprehension.” Psychological Review 87 (4): 329–354.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Kruger, Jan-Louis, María T. Soto-Sanfiel, Stephen Doherty, and Ronny Ibrahim
2016 “Towards a Cognitive Audiovisual Translatology.” In Reembedding Translation Process Research, ed. by Ricardo Muñoz Martín, 171–194. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Künzli, Alexander, and Maureen Ehrensberger-Dow
2011 “Innovative Subtitling: A Reception Study.” In Methods and Strategies of Process Research: Integrative Approaches in Translation Studies, ed. by Cecilia Alvstad, Adelina Hild, and Elisabet Tiselius, 187–200. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larson, Adam M., and Lester C. Loschky
2009 “The Contributions of Central Versus Peripheral Vision to Scene Gist Recognition.” Journal of Vision 9 (10): 6.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Moran, John, David Lewis, and Christian Saam
2014 “Analysis of Post-Editing Data: a Productivity Field Test Using an Instrumented CAT Tool.” In Post-Editing of Machine Translation: Processes and Applications, ed. by Sharon O’Brien, Laura Balling, Michael Carl, Michel Simard, and Lucia Specia, 126–146. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Nakayama, Minoru, Koji Takahashi, and Yasutaka Shimizu
2002 “The Act of Task Difficulty and Eye-movement Frequency for the ‘Oculo-motor Indices’.” In Proceedings of the Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications – ETRA ‘02, ed. by Andrew T. Duchowski, Roel Vertegaal, and John W. Senders, 37–42. New York, USA: ACM Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon
2006 “Eye-tracking and Translation Memory Matches.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 14 (3): 185–205.DOI logo.Google Scholar
2009 “Eye Tracking in Translation Process Research: Methodological Challenges and Solutions.” In Methodology, Technology and Innovation in Translation Process Research: A Tribute to Arnt Lykke Jakobsen, ed. by Inger Mees, Fabio Alves, and Susanne Göpferich, 251–266. Copenhagen: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
O’Brien, Sharon, Minako O’Hagan, and Marian Flanagan
2010 “Keeping an Eye on the UI Design of Translation Memory: How do Translators Use the Concordance Feature?” In Proceedings of the 28th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics, ed. by Willem-Paul Brinckman, and Mark Neerincx, 187–190. Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar
Orrego-Carmona, David
2016 “A Reception Study on Non-professional Subtitling: Do Audiences Notice Any Difference?Across Languages and Cultures 17 (2): 163–181.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Posner, Michael I.
1980 “Orienting of Attention.” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 32 (1): 3–25.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Risku, Hanna, and Florian Windhager
2013 “Extended Translation: a Sociocognitive Research Agenda.” Target 25 (1): 33–45.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Teixeira, Carlos S. C.
2014 “Data Collection Methods for Researching the Interaction Between Translators and Translation Tools: An ‘Ecological’ Approach.” In The Development of Translation Competence: Theories and Methodologies from Psycholinguistics and Cognitive Science, ed. by John W. Schwieter, and Aline Ferreira, 269–286. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Teixeira, Carlos S. C., and Sharon O’Brien
2017 “Investigating the Cognitive Ergonomic Aspects of Translation Tools in a Workplace Setting.” In Translation Practice in the Field: Current Research on Socio-Cognitive Processes, ed. by Hanna Risku, Regina Rogl, and Jelena Milosevic. Translation Spaces 6 (1): 79–103.DOI logo.Google Scholar
Weatherhead, James
2015 Email communication.Google Scholar
Wright, Richard D., and Lawrence M. Ward
2008Orienting of Attention. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Cui, Ying, Xiao Liu & Yuqin Cheng
2023. A Comparative Study on the Effort of Human Translation and Post-Editing in Relation to Text Types: An Eye-Tracking and Key-Logging Experiment. SAGE Open 13:1  pp. 215824402311558 ff. DOI logo
Jiménez-Crespo, Miguel A.
2020. The “technological turn” in translation studies. Translation Spaces 9:2  pp. 314 ff. DOI logo
Kruger, Jan-Louis
2021. Eye tracking. In Handbook of Translation Studies [Handbook of Translation Studies, 5],  pp. 80 ff. DOI logo
Su, Wenchao
2023. Eye-voice span in sight interpreting: an eye-tracking investigation. Perspectives 31:5  pp. 969 ff. DOI logo
Walker, Callum
2021. Investigating how we read translations. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8:2  pp. 482 ff. DOI logo
Walker, Callum
2021. The Cognitive Paradigm in Translation Studies. In An Eye-Tracking Study of Equivalent Effect in Translation,  pp. 13 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 may 2024. 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.