User expectations research revisited
Methodological considerations
Survey-based user expectations research is an important line of research on quality in the domain of simultaneous conference interpreting. Its methodology has often been criticised for a lack of rigour. However, few have treated methodology as the focus of their discussion. In this chapter, a comprehensive overview of the methodological issues of survey-based user expectations research is provided, with topics covering the construct, criteria, instrument, response format, levels of measurement, measures of central tendency, and sampling. As an illustration for the methodology under discussion, the results of the classic study by Bühler (1986) are reanalysed by using different measures of central tendency. The chapter concludes with a discussion on the importance of incorporating users’ actual experience to make user-related research on interpreting more relevant.
Article outline
- Introduction
- User expectations research: Methodology
- The construct
- The criteria
- The instrument
- Response format and levels of measurement
- Multipoint rating
- Rank-ordering
- Combining multipoint rating and rank-ordering
- Measures of central tendency
- Sampling
- User expectations research: Comparability issues
- User expectations research: What to expect?
- Conclusion
-
Acknowledgement
-
Notes
-
References
References (46)
References
AIIC. 2022a. “AIIC at a Glance.” Accessed May 22, 2022. [URL]
AIIC. 2022b. “Committee for Admissions and Language Classification.” Accessed May 22, 2022. [URL]
AIIC. 2022c. “Count on Us.” Accessed May 22, 2022. [URL]
Berk-Seligson, Susan. 1988. “The Impact of Politeness in Witness Testimony: The Influence of the Court Interpreter.” Multilingua 7 (4): 411–440. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Burns, Karen E. A., Mark Duffett, Michelle E. Kho, Maureen O. Meade, Neill K. J. Adhikari, Tasnim Sinuff, Deborah J. Cook, and ACCADEMY Group. 2008. “A Guide for the Design and Conduct of Self-administered Surveys of Clinicians.” CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal) 179 (3): 246–252. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bühler, Hildegund. 1986. “Linguistic (Semantic) and Extra-linguistic (Pragmatic) Criteria for the Evaluation of Conference Interpretation and Interpreters.” Multilingua 5 (4): 231–235.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chiaro, Delia, and Giuseppe Nocella. 2004. “Interpreters’ Perception of Linguistic and Non-linguistic Factors Affecting Quality: A Survey through the World Wide Web.” Meta 49 (2): 278–93. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Christensen, Tina Paulsen. 2011. “User Expectations and Evaluation: A Case Study of a Court Interpreting Event.” Perspectives, Studies in Translatology 19 (1): 1–24. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cohen, Ronald Jay, Mark Swerdlik, and Edward Sturman. 2013. Psychological Testing and Assessment: An Introduction to Tests and Measurement. 8thed. New York: McGraw-Hill.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Collados Aís, Ángela. 1998/2002. “Quality Assessment in Simultaneous Interpreting: The Importance of Nonverbal Communication.” In The Interpreting Studies Reader, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker and Miriam Shlesinger, 327–336. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Collados Aís, Ángela, and García Becerra, Olalla. 2015. “Quality Criteria.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 337–338. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Wit, Maya, and Irma Sluis. 2014. “Sign Language Interpreter Quality: The Perspective of Deaf Sign Language Users in the Netherlands.” The Interpreter’s Newsletter 19: 63–85.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Díaz, Jessica Pérez-Luzardo. 2015. “The Style Parameter in Quality Evaluation and Expectations of Simultaneous Interpreting.” Sendebar 26: 213–233.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Garzone, Giuliana. 2003. “Reliability of quality criteria evaluation in survey research.” In La evaluación de la calidad en interpretación: investigación, ed. by Ángela Collados Aís, María Manuela Fernández Sánchez, and Daniel Gile, 23–30. Granada: Comares Interlingua.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Garzone, Giuliana. 2015. “Norms.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 281–283. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grbić, Nadja. 2015. “Quality.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 333–336. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gumul, Ewa. 2015. “Cohesion.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 63–64. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kurz, Ingrid. 1989. “Conference Interpreting – User Expectations.” In Coming of Age: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the American Translators Association, 143–148. Medford, NJ: Learned Information.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kurz, Ingrid. 1993. “Conference Interpretation: Expectations of Different User Groups.” The Interpreter’s Newsletter 5: 13–21.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kurz, Ingrid. 2001. “Conference Interpreting: Quality in the Ears of the User.” Meta 46 (2): 394–409. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kurz, Ingrid, and Franz Pöchhacker. 1995. “Quality in TV Interpreting.” Translatio. Nouvelles de la FIT – FIT Newsletter 14 (3/4): 350–358.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lewis, James R. 1993. “Multipoint Scales: Mean and Median Differences and Observed Significance Levels,” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 5 (4): 383–392. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mack, Gabriele, and Lorella Cattaruzza. 1995. “User Surveys in Simultaneous Interpretation: A Means of Learning about Quality and/or Raising Some Reasonable Doubts.” In Topics in Interpreting Research, ed. by Jorma Tommola, 37–49. Turku, Finland: Centre for Translation and Interpreting, University of Turku.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Marrone, Stefano. 1993. “Quality: A Shared Objective.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 5: 35–41.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2001. “Quality Assessment in Conference and Community Interpreting.” META 46 (2): 410–425. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2005. “Quality Research Revisited.” The Interpreters’ Newsletter 13: 143–166.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2015. “User Expectations.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 430–432. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pöchhacker, Franz. 2022. Introducing Interpreting Studies, 3rd ed. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pradas Macías, E. Macarena. 2015. “Fluency.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Interpreting Studies, ed. by Franz Pöchhacker, 165–166. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sauro, Jeff, and James R. Lewis. 2016. Quantifying the User Experience: Practical Statistics for User Research. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Morgan Kauffman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stevens, Stanley S. 1946. “On the Theory of Scales of Measurement.” Science 103 (2684): 677–680. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Teas, R. Kenneth. 1993. “Expectations, Performance Evaluation, and Consumers’ Perceptions of Quality.” Journal of Marketing 57 (4): 18–34.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Terpstra, Maarten, Ton Kuijlen, and Klaas Sijtsma. 2014. “How to Develop a Customer Satisfaction Scale with the Optimal Construct Validity.” Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology 48 (5): 2719–2737. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Visser, Penny. S., Jon A. Krosnick, and Paul J. Lavrakas. 2000. “Survey Research.” In Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology, ed. by H. T. Reis, and C. M. Judd, 223–252. Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vuorikoski, Anna-Riitta. 1993. “Simultaneous Interpretation – User Experience and Expectations.” In Translation – the Vital Link: Proceedings of the XIIIth World Congress of FIT, ed. by Catriona Picken, 317–327. London: Institute of Translation and Interpreting.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wadensjö, Cecilia. 1998. Interpreting as Interaction. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Weijters, Bert, Elke Cabooter, and Niels Schillewaert. 2010. “The Effect of Rating Scale Format on Response Styles: The Number of Response Categories and Response Category Labels.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 27: 236–247. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zwischenberger, Cornelia. 2013. Qualität und Rollenbilder beim Simultanen Konferenzdolmetschen. Berlin: Frank & Timme Verlag.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 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.