Cover not available
Article published In:
Interpreting
Vol. 21:2 (2019) ► pp.165–195

Meta-analyses of simultaneous interpreting and working memory

ORCID logo | University of North Carolina at Charlotte
ORCID logo | Butler University
This article adopts a meta-analytic research framework to examine the strength of the relationship between working memory and simultaneous interpreting. This quantitative analysis utilizes a random effects model to combine multiple studies in an examination of differences between professional interpreters and various comparison groups as well as the relationship between working memory capacity and interpreter performance. Moderating and control variables are discussed, and a classification scheme for work on these topics is proposed. Two moderating variables are examined by testing the difference between working memory tests relying on auditory and visual stimuli as well as storage tasks (short-term memory) and processing tasks (working memory). Published studies were collected from several field-specific databases by querying working memory and simultaneous interpreting as key terms, and then supplemented by reviewing references, searching Google Scholar, and reviewing the work of scholars known to work in the area. Results are indicative of differences between professional and comparison groups, with professional interpreters exhibiting greater working memory capacity. Additionally, an overall positive correlation was observed between working memory capacity and measures of the quality of simultaneous interpreting.
Keywords: simultaneous interpreting, working memory, meta-analysis, expertise, cognitive processing
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Background and motivation
    • Comparison of professional interpreters to comparison groups
    • Relationship between working memory and interpreting expertise
    • Moderating variables
    • Considerations of experimental design
  • Methods
    • Literature search
    • Analysis
  • Results
    • Professional status
    • Interpreting expertise
    • Moderating variables
    • Considerations of experimental design
  • Discussion
    • Limitations
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 11 November 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/intp.00026.mel
References (86)
References
Babcock, L. & Vallesi, A. (2017). Are simultaneous interpreters expert bilinguals, unique bilinguals, or both? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 20 (2), 403–417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bajo, M. T., Padilla, F. & Padilla, P. (2000). Comprehension processing in simultaneous interpreting. In Y. Gambier, N. G. San Salvador & A. Chesterman (Eds.), Translation in context: Selected contributions from the EST congress, Granada, 1998. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 127–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Borenstein, M., Higgins, J. P. T., Hedges, L. V. & Rothstein, H. R. (2017). Basics of meta-analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Research Synthesis Methods 8 (1), 5–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, I. K. (2006). Listening while talking: The retention of prose under articulatory suppression in relation to simultaneous interpreting. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 18 (2), 206–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, I. K. & de Groot, A. M. B. (2009). Simultaneous interpreting: A cognitive perspective. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 454–479.Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., de Groot, A. M. B. & Kroll, J. F. (2006). Memory and language skills in simultaneous interpreters: The role of expertise and language proficiency. Journal of Memory and Language 54 (3), 324–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., de Groot, A. M. B. & Waldorp, L. J. (2003). Basic skills in a complex task: A graphical model relating lexical retrieval, working memory, and simultaneous interpreting. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6 (3), 201–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cochran, W. G. (1954). The combination of estimates from different experiments. Biometrics 10 (1), 101–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Colomer, S. E. (2010). Dual role interpreters: Spanish teachers in new Latino communities. Hispania 93 (3), 490–503.Google Scholar
Conway, A. R., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O. & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 12 (5), 769–786. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M. & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19 (4), 450–466. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M. & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 3 (4), 422–433. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Darò, V. (1989). The role of memory and attention in simultaneous interpretation: A neurolinguistics approach. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 21, 50–56.Google Scholar
Diriker, E. (2015). Simultaneous interpreting. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies. New York: Routledge, 382–385.Google Scholar
Dong, Y. & Cai, R. (2015). Working memory and interpreting: A commentary on theoretical models. In Z. Wen, M. B. Mota, & A. McNeill (Eds.), Working memory in second language acquisition and processing. Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 63–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duis, S. S., Dean, R. S. & Derks, P. (1994). The modality effect: A result of methodology? International Journal of Neuroscience 78 (1–2), 1–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duval, S. J. & Tweedie, R. L. (2000a). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 56 (2), 455–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000b). A nonparametric “trim and fill” method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association 95 (449), 89–98.Google Scholar
Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E. & Conway, A. R. (1999). Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 128 (3), 309–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García, A. (2014). The interpreter advantage hypothesis: Preliminary data patterns and empirically motivated questions. Translation and Interpreting Studies 9 (2), 219–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gile, D. (2015). The contributions of cognitive psychology and psycholinguistics to conference interpreting: A critical analysis. In A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 41–64.Google Scholar
(2016). Experimental research. In C. Angelelli & B. J. Baer (Eds.), Researching translation and interpreting. New York: Routledge, 220–228.Google Scholar
Glass, G. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher 5 (10), 3–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, M. & Lumley, T. (2017). forestplot: Advanced forest plot using ‘grid’ graphics. R package version 1.7.Google Scholar
Gregoire, J. & van der Linden, M. (1997). Effect of age on forward and backward digit spans. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition 4 (2), 140–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hardy, R. J., & Thompson, S. G. (1998). Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 17 (8), 841–856. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hedges, L. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass’ estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics 6 (2), 107–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hedges, L. V. & Olkin, I. (1980). Vote counting methods in research synthesis. Psychological Bulletin 88 (2), 359–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hedges, L. V. & Pigott, T. D. (2001). The power of statistical tests in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods 6 (3), 203–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Higgins, J. P. & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Statistics in Medicine 211, 1539–1558. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hiltunen, S., Pääkkönen, R., Vik, G.-V. & Krause, C. M. (2016). On interpreters’ working memory and executive control. International Journal of Bilingualism 20 (3), 297–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunter, J. E. & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Injoque-Ricle, I., Barreyro, J. P., Formoso, J. & Jaichenco, V. (2015). Expertise, working memory and articulatory suppression effect: Their relation with simultaneous interpreting performance. Advances in Cognitive Psychology 11 (2), 56–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jääskeläinen, R. (2010). Are all professionals experts? Definitions of expertise and reinterpretation of research evidence in process studies. In E. Angelone & G. Shreve (Eds.), Translation and cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 213–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Köpke, B. & Nespoulous, J.-L. (2006). Working memory performance in expert and novice interpreters. Interpreting 8 (1), 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Köpke, B. & Signorelli, T. M. (2012). Methodological aspects of working memory assessment in simultaneous interpreters. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2), 183–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology 41, 863. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, M. (2011). Working memory performance of expert and novice interpreters. Journal of Universal Language 12 (1), 95–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J. & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. BMJ 3391: b2700. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, M., Schallert, D. L. & Carroll, P. J. (2004). Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting 6 (1), 19–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macnamara, B. N. & Conway, A. R. A. (2014). Novel evidence in support of the bilingual advantage: Influences of task demands and experience on cognitive control and working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 21 (2), 520–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Working memory capacity as a predictor of simultaneous language interpreting performance. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 5 (4), 434–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macnamara, B. N., Moore, A. B., Kegl, J. A. & Conway, A. R. A. (2011). Domain-general cognitive abilities and simultaneous interpreting skill. Interpreting 13 (1), 121–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Melan, C., Galy, E. & Cariou, M. (2007). Mnemonic processing in air traffic controllers (ATCs): Effects of task parameters and work organization. International Journal of Aviation Psychology 17 (4), 391–490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Melby-Lervåg, M. & Hulme, C. (2013). Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Developmental Psychology 49 (2), 270–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Melby-Lervåg, M., Redick, T. S. & Hulme, C. (2016). Working memory training does not improve performance on measures of intelligence or other measures of “far transfer.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 11 (4), 512–534. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mellinger, C. D. & Hanson, T. A. (2017). Quantitative research methods in translation and interpreting studies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G. & The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine 6 (7), 1–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morales, J., Padilla, F., Gómez-Ariza, C. J. & Bajo, M. T. (2015). Simultaneous interpretation selectively influences working memory and attentional networks. Acta Psychologica 1551, 82–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moser-Mercer, B., Frauenfelder, U. H., Casado, B. & Künzli, A. (2000). Searching to define expertise in interpreting. In K. Hyltenstam & B. Englund Dimitrova (Eds.), Language processing and simultaneous interpreting: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 107–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Padilla, P., Bajo, M. T., Cañas, J. J. & Padilla, F. (1995). Cognitive processes of memory in simultaneous interpretation. In J. Tommola (Ed.), Topics in interpreting research. Turku, Finland: University of Turku, 61–71.Google Scholar
R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, M. S. (2005). The file-drawer problem revisited: A general weighted method for calculating fail-safe numbers in meta-analysis. Evolution 59 (2), 464–468. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin 86 (3), 638–641. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothe-Neves, R. (2003). The influence of working memory features on some formal aspects of translation performance. In F. Alves (Ed.), Triangulating translation: Perspectives in process-oriented research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 97–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Setton, R. & Dawrant, A. (2016). Conference interpreting – A complete course and trainer’s guide. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seeber, K. G. (2011). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Existing theories – new models. Interpreting 13 (2), 176–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Cognitive load in simultaneous interpreting: Measures and methods. Target 25 (1), 18–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seleskovitch, D. (1968/1978). Interpreting for international conferences. Problems of language and communication. Washington: Pen and Booth.Google Scholar
Signorelli, T. M., Haarmann, H. J. & Obler, L. K. (2012). Working memory in simultaneous interpreters: Effects of task and age. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2), 198–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stavrakaki, S., Megari, K., Kosmidis, M. H., Apostolidou, M. & Takou, E. (2012). Working memory and verbal fluency in simultaneous interpreters. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 34 (6), 624–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sterne, J. A. C. & Harbord, R. M. (2004). Funnel plots in meta-analysis. The Stata Journal 41, 127–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S. G. & Pocock, S. J. (1991). Can meta-analysis be trusted? The Lancet 338 (8775), 1127–1130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Š. (2008). Working memory and simultaneous interpreting. In P. Boulogne (Ed.), Translation and its others: Selected papers of the CETRA research seminar in translation studies 2007. [URL]
(2015). Working memory. In F. Pöchhacker (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of interpreting studies. New York: Routledge, 443–446.Google Scholar
Timarová, Š. et al. (2014). Simultaneous interpreting and working memory executive control. Interpreting 16 (2), 139–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Timarová, Š., Čeňková, I., Meylaerts, R., Hertog, E., Szmalec, A. & Duyck, W. (2015). Simultaneous interpreting and working memory capacity. In A. Ferreira & J. W. Schwieter (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and cognitive inquiries into translation and interpreting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 101–126.Google Scholar
Tzou, Y.-Z., Eslami, Z. R., Chen, H.-C. & Vaid, J. (2012). Effect of language proficiency and degree of formal training in simultaneous interpreting on working memory and interpreting performance: Evidence from Mandarin-English speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism 16 (2), 213–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van der Noort, M. W. M. L., Bosch, P. & Hugdahl, K. (2006). Foreign language proficiency and working memory capacity. European Psychologist 11 (4), 289–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, R., Christoffels, I. K., Postma, A. & Hermans, D. (2012). The relation between the working memory skills of sign language interpreters and the quality of their interpretations. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 15 (2), 340–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vevea, J. L. & Woods, C. M. (2005). Publication bias in research synthesis: Sensitivity analysis using a priori weight functions. Psychological Methods 10 (4), 428–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Viechtbauer, W. (2005). Bias and efficiency of meta-analytic variance estimators in the random-effects model. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 30 (3), 261–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software 36 (3), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Viechtbauer, W. & Cheung, M. W.-L. (2010). Outlier and influence diagnostics for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods 1 (2), 112–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Von Hippel, P. T. (2015). The heterogeneity statistic I2 can be biased in small meta-analyses. BMC Medical Research Methodology 151, 35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, J. & Napier, J. (2013). Signed language working memory capacity of signed language interpreters and deaf signers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 18 (2), 271–286. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Measuring bilingual working memory capacity of professional Auslan/English interpreters: A comparison of two scoring methods. The Interpreters’ Newsletter 191, 45–62.Google Scholar
Wingfield, A., Stine, E. A. L., Lahar, C. J. & Aberdeen, J. S. (1988). Does the capacity of working memory change with age? Experimental Aging Research 14 (2–3), 103–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woumans, E., Ceuleers, E., Van der Linden, L., Szmalec, A. & Duyck, W. (2015). Verbal and nonverbal cognitive control in bilinguals and interpreters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 41 (5), 1579–1586.Google Scholar
Wright, H. H. (2016). Cognition, language, and aging. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, H., Yang, S., Ceci, S. J. & Wang, Q. (2005). Effects of bilinguals’ controlled-attention on working memory and recognition. In J. Cohen, K. T. McAlister, K. Rolstand, & J. MacSwan (Eds.), ISB4 proceedings of the 4th international symposium on bilingualism. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 2401–2404.Google Scholar
Yudes, C., Macizo, P. & Bajo, T. (2012). Coordinating comprehension and production in simultaneous interpreters: Evidence from the articulatory suppression effect. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 15 (2), 329–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yudes, C., Macizo, P., Morales, L. & Bajo, M. T. (2013). Comprehension and error monitoring in simultaneous interpreters. Applied Psycholinguistics 34 (5), 1039–1057. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (36)

Cited by 36 other publications

Morrison, Louisa, Zoe Given‐Wilson & Amina Memon
2024. The impact of emotionally evocative information on interpreting accuracy in a mock asylum interview. Applied Cognitive Psychology 38:2 DOI logo
Zhao, Hongming, Xiaocong Chen & Yanping Dong
2024. Young interpreting trainees’ better adaptation to the flanker conflicting environment: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics 70 ► pp. 101181 ff. DOI logo
Zou, Deyan & Jiahao Guo
2024. Parallel translation process in consecutive interpreting: Differences between beginning and advanced interpreting students. Acta Psychologica 248 ► pp. 104358 ff. DOI logo
Cai, Rendong, Jiexuan Lin & Yanping Dong
2023. Psychological factors and interpreting competence in interpreting students: a developmental study. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 17:2 ► pp. 246 ff. DOI logo
Chung, Hye-Yeon
2023. Context-embedded phonological memory in interpreters. Lebende Sprachen 68:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Elmer, Stefan & Nathalie Giroud
2023. Simultaneous interpreting, brain aging, and cognition. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 6:2 ► pp. 118 ff. DOI logo
Han, Chao, Xiaolei Lu & Peixin Zhang
2023. Use of statistical methods in translation and interpreting research. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 35:4 ► pp. 483 ff. DOI logo
Han, Chao & Liuyan Yang
2023. Relating utterance fluency to perceived fluency of interpreting. Translation and Interpreting Studies 18:3 ► pp. 421 ff. DOI logo
KUMCU, Alper
2023. Emotional Language Processing in Bilingualism: Subjective Affect and Prosodic Markers in Simultaneous Interpreting. Cankaya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 17:2 ► pp. 194 ff. DOI logo
Moratto, Riccardo & Zhimiao Yang
2023. Probing the cognitive load of consecutive interpreters. Translation and Interpreting Studies DOI logo
Song, Shuxian & Dechao Li
2023. Aptitude for interpreting: the predictive value of cognitive fluency. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 17:1 ► pp. 155 ff. DOI logo
Su, Wenchao
2023. Eye-voice span in sight interpreting: an eye-tracking investigation. Perspectives 31:5 ► pp. 969 ff. DOI logo
Wallinheimo, Anna-Stiina, Simon L. Evans & Elena Davitti
2023. Training in new forms of human-AI interaction improves complex working memory and switching skills of language professionals. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 6 DOI logo
Xu, Yi
2023. Exploring individual differences in the prediction of awareness and improvement in trainee interpreters: an aptitude-treatment interaction approach. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 17:1 ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo
Zhao, Nan, Zhenguang G. Cai, Yanping Dong & Daniel Mirman
2023. Speech errors in consecutive interpreting: Effects of language proficiency, working memory, and anxiety. PLOS ONE 18:10 ► pp. e0292718 ff. DOI logo
Özkan, Deniz, Ena Hodzik & Ebru Diriker
2023. Simultaneous interpreting experience enhances the use of case markers for prediction in Turkish. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 25:2 ► pp. 186 ff. DOI logo
Boos, Michael, Matthias Kobi, Stefan Elmer & Lutz Jäncke
2022. The influence of experience on cognitive load during simultaneous interpretation. Brain and Language 234 ► pp. 105185 ff. DOI logo
Ghiselli, Serena
2022. Working memory tasks in interpreting studies. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 5:1 ► pp. 50 ff. DOI logo
Han, Chao
2022. Interpreting testing and assessment: A state-of-the-art review. Language Testing 39:1 ► pp. 30 ff. DOI logo
Han, Chao
2023. Interrogating the predictive validity of aptitude testing for interpreting: a systematic methodological review. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 17:1 ► pp. 7 ff. DOI logo
Yu, Zhibin & Yanping Dong
2022. The Emergence of a Complex Language Skill: Evidence from the Self-organization of Interpreting Competence in Interpreting Students. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 25:2 ► pp. 269 ff. DOI logo
Zhong, Fei, Yanping Dong & Yaqiong Liu
2022. Neural correlates of contributions of interpreting training to second language semantic integration. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 75:1 ► pp. 118 ff. DOI logo
Zhu, Xuelian & Vahid Aryadoust
2022. A Synthetic Review of Cognitive Load in Distance Interpreting: Toward an Explanatory Model. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
Ho, Chen-En
2021. What does professional experience have to offer?. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 4:1 ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
Tiselius, Elisabet & Birgitta Englund Dimitrova
2021. Turn-taking in dialogue interpreting. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 8:2 ► pp. 328 ff. DOI logo
Valdeón, Roberto A.
2021. Perspectives on interpreting. Perspectives 29:4 ► pp. 441 ff. DOI logo
Abdel Latif, Muhammad M. M.
2020. Translation/Interpreting Process Research. In Translator and Interpreter Education Research [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo
Díaz-Galaz, Stephanie
2020. Listening and comprehension in interpreting. Translation and Interpreting Studies 15:2 ► pp. 304 ff. DOI logo
Goodman-Delahunty, Jane, Natalie Martschuk, Sandra B. Hale & Susan E. Brandon
2020. Interpreted Police Interviews: A Review of Contemporary Research. In Advances in Psychology and Law [Advances in Psychology and Law, 5], ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Mellinger, Christopher D. & Thomas A. Hanson
2020. Meta-analysis and replication in interpreting studies. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 22:1 ► pp. 140 ff. DOI logo
Nour, Soudabeh, Esli Struys & Helene Stengers
2020. Adaptive control in interpreters: Assessing the impact of training and experience on working memory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 23:4 ► pp. 772 ff. DOI logo
Nour, Soudabeh, Esli Struys, Evy Woumans, Ily Hollebeke & Hélène Stengers
2020. An interpreter advantage in executive functions?. Interpreting. International Journal of Research and Practice in Interpreting 22:2 ► pp. 163 ff. DOI logo
Parshutina, G. A.
2020. Teaching consecutive interpretation as a way to develop professional competences of future specialists in international affairs. Professional Discourse & Communication 2:2 ► pp. 58 ff. DOI logo
Zhao, Hongming & Yanping Dong
2020. The early presence and developmental trend of interpreter advantages incognitive flexibility. Translation, Cognition & Behavior 3:2 ► pp. 241 ff. DOI logo
胡, 敏霞
2020. The Impact of Cognitive Control on the Interpreting Proficiency of Trainee Interpreters. Modern Linguistics 08:05 ► pp. 647 ff. DOI logo
胡, 敏霞
2021. The Two-Way Relationship between Interpreting Experience and Working Memory—A Review of Empirical Evidence. Modern Linguistics 09:01 ► pp. 187 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 september 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.