Article published In:
Vol. 23:2 (2021) ► pp.245268
References (43)
Angelelli, C. & Jacobson, H. E.
(Eds.) (2009) Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barik, H. C.
(1975) Simultaneous interpretation: Temporal and quantitative data. Language and Speech 16 (3), 237–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bühler, H.
(1986) Linguistic (semantic) and extra-linguistic (pragmatic) criteria for the evaluation of conference interpretation and interpreters. Mutlilingua 5 (4), 231–235.Google Scholar
Campbell, S. & Hale, S.
(2003) Translation and interpreting assessment in the context of educational measurement. In G. Anderman & M. Rogers (Eds.), Translation today: Trends and perspectives. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 205–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B.
(1966) An experiment in evaluating the quality of translations. Mechanical Translation and Computational Linguistics 9 (3–4), 55–66.Google Scholar
Chesterman, A.
(2016) Memes of translation: The spread of ideas in translation theory (revised edition). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coughlin, D.
(2003) Correlating automated and human assessments of machine translation quality. Retrieved from [URL]
Eckes, T.
(2015) Introduction to many-facet Rasch measurement: Analyzing and evaluating rater-mediated assessments. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gerver, D.
(1969/2002) The effects of source language presentation rate on the performance of simultaneous conference interpreters. In F. Pöchhacker & M. Shlesinger (Eds.), The interpreting studies reader. London: Routledge, 53–66.Google Scholar
Gile, D.
(1999) Variability in the perception of fidelity in simultaneous interpretation. Hermes 221, 51–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Interpreting studies: A critical view from within. MonTI 11, 135–155. [URL]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamidi, M. & Pöchhacker, F.
(2007) Simultaneous consecutive interpreting: A new technique put to the test. Meta 52 (2), 276–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Investigating score dependability in English/Chinese interpreter certification performance testing: A generalizability theory approach. Language Assessment Quarterly 13 (3), 186–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017) Using analytic rating scales to assess English/Chinese bidirectional interpretation: A longitudinal Rasch analysis of scale utility and rater behavior. Linguistica Antverpiensia New Series – Themes in Translation Studies 161, 196–215.Google Scholar
(2018b) Latent trait modelling of rater accuracy in formative peer assessment of English–Chinese consecutive interpreting. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 43 (6), 979–994. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019) A generalizability theory study of optimal measurement design for a summative assessment of English/Chinese consecutive interpreting. Language Testing 36(3), 419–438. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hlavac, J.
(2013) A cross-national overview of translator and interpreter certification procedures. Translation & Interpreting 51, 32–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, J.
(2008) Rating scales for interpreting performance assessment. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 2 (2), 165–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, T-H.
(1999) Simultaneous listening and speaking in English into Korean simultaneous interpretation. Meta 44 (1), 560–572. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, M-H.
(2004) Working memory and expertise in simultaneous interpreting. Interpreting 6 (1), 19–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Design and analysis of Taiwan’s interpretation certification examination. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 163–178.Google Scholar
Liu, M-H., Chang, C-C. & Wu, S-C.
(2008) Interpretation evaluation practices: Comparison of eleven schools in Taiwan, China, Britain, and the USA. Compilation and Translation Review 1 (1), 1–42.Google Scholar
Meuleman, C. & Van Besien, F.
Myford, C. M. & Wolfe, E. W.
(2003) Detecting and measuring rater effects using many-facet Rasch measurement: Part I. Journal of Applied Measurement 4 (4), 386–422.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, F.
(2004) Introducing interpreting studies. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, D. B.
Setton, R. & Dawrant, A.
(2016) Conference interpreting: A trainer’s guide. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Setton, R. & Motta, M.
Skaaden, H.
(2013) Assessing interpreter aptitude in a variety of languages. In D. Tsagari & R. van Deemter (Eds.), Assessment issues in language translation and interpreting. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 35–50.Google Scholar
Stemler, S. E. & Tsai, J.
(2008) Best practices in estimating interrater reliability: Three common approaches. In J. Osborne (Ed.), Best practices in quantitative methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 29–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tiselius, E.
(2009) Revisiting Carroll’s scales. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 95–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tommola, J. & Helevä, M.
(1998) Language direction and source text complexity: Effects on trainee performance in simultaneous interpreting. In L. Bowker, M. Cronin, D. Kenny & J. Pearson (Eds.), Unity in diversity? Current trends in translation studies. Manchester: St Jerome, 177–186.Google Scholar
Vermeiren, H., Gucht, J. V. & De Bontridder, L.
(2009) Standards as critical success factors in assessments: Certifying social interpreters in Flanders, Belgium. In C. V. Angelelli & H. E. Jacobson (Eds.), Testing and assessment in translation and interpreting studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 291–330. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, W-W., Xu, Y., Wang, B-H. & Mu, L.
(2020) Developing interpreting competence scales in China. Frontiers in Psychology 111, 481. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wu, J., Liu, M. & Liao, C.
(2013) Analytic scoring in interpretation test: Construct validity and the halo effect. In H-H. Liao, T-E. Kao & Y. Lin (Eds.), The making of a translator: Multiple perspectives. Taipei: Bookman, 277–292.Google Scholar
Wu, S. C.
(2010) Assessing simultaneous interpreting: A study on test reliability and examiners’ assessment behavior. PhD thesis, Newcastle University.Google Scholar
Yeh, S.-P. & Liu, M.
(2006) A more objective approach to interpretation evaluation: Exploring the use of scoring rubrics. Compilation and Translation Review 34 (4), 57–78.Google Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by 8 other publications

Al-Amin, Md., Fatematuz Zahra Saqui & Md. Rabbi Khan
2024. Enhancing Assessment Systems in Higher Education. In Utilizing AI for Assessment, Grading, and Feedback in Higher Education [Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design, ],  pp. 28 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
Han, Chao, Juan Hu & Yi Deng
2023. Effects of language background and directionality on raters’ assessments of spoken-language interpreting. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 36:2  pp. 556 ff. DOI logo
Han, Chao & Xiaolei Lu
2023. Can automated machine translation evaluation metrics be used to assess students’ interpretation in the language learning classroom?. Computer Assisted Language Learning 36:5-6  pp. 1064 ff. DOI logo
Han, Chao & Xiaoqi Shang
2023. An item-based, Rasch-calibrated approach to assessing translation quality. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 35:1  pp. 63 ff. DOI logo
Zhao, Nan
2023. A validation study of a consecutive interpreting test using many-facet Rasch analysis. Frontiers in Communication 7 DOI logo
Chen, Jing, Huabo Yang & Chao Han
2022. Holistic versus analytic scoring of spoken-language interpreting: a multi-perspectival comparative analysis. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 16:4  pp. 558 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

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.