An interpreter advantage in executive functions?

Nour, Soudabeh; Struys, Esli; Woumans, Evy; Hollebeke, Ily; Stengers, Hélène

doi:10.1075/intp.00045.nou

Cited by 9 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In cross-sectional between-group comparisons, 69% of publications on shifting supported an interpreter advantage, while all longitudinal studies (100%) presented positive evidence. The results aligned with the conclusion in Nour et al (2020). Besides, the interpreter advantage in shifting was also shown in the meta-analysis of two shifting tasks (SMD = 0.68 for WCST and SMD = -0.32 for Task-switching).…”

Section: Shiftingsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…(Diamond, 2013;Gilbert and Burgess, 2008;Miyake et al, 2000). Nour et al (2020) found evidence for the interpreter advantage in shifting and updating, but not in inhibition. In the mean times, the meta-analysis by Wen andDong (2019, cut-off before Oct.30, 2018) and Mellinger andHanson (2019, cut-off before Dec. 2016) revealed significant effects for the interpreter advantage in STM and WM.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…L2 listening span is complex span task that requires the participants to recall the last word of a set of each sentence after listening in their second language (L2) and judging if the sentences make sense. The inclusion criteria are the same except for the scoring method, which can be the total number of correctly recalled words (Nour et al, 2020) or the highest number of recalled words for more than two out of five sentence set (truncated span) (Liu et al, 2004). Six studies included the L2 listen span task, but only four met all the selection criteria, with seven datasets.…”

Section: Updating: L2 Listening Spanmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given that prior findings are far from consistent on the presumed interpreter advantage in EFs, important patterns and moderators may be revealed in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Therefore, this research aims to synthesize existing evidence on the impact of interpreting training and/or experience on EFs, expanding on the systematic review by Nour et al (2020) and the metaanalysis by Wen and Dong (2019) and Mellinger and Hanson (2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The interpreter advantage in executive functions—A systematic review and meta-analysis

Fan

2021

FLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given the heavy cognitive load inherent in language interpreting, interpreters may develop cognitive advantages from managing frequent switching of linguistic codes and working modes. Based on a systematic review of executive functions of inhibiting, shifting and working memory (WM) updating by Nour et al. (2020) and meta-analysis of working memory by Wen and Dong (2019) and Mellinger and Hanson (2019), this research follows the PICOS framework and the PRISMA guideline to synthesize findings from 98 tasks of 29 original studies from International and Chinese databases with a cut-off date of 1st October, 2020. Substantial evidence for an interpreter advantage in shifting was found, but not for inhibition or updating. The meta-analysis showed 1) a moderate to high effect in shifting (g = 0.68, seven WCST effects; g = -0.32, eight switching cost effects); 2) no effect in inhibiting (g = 0.13, six Stroop effects); 3) mixed effects in WM updating. Subgroup analysis on WM updating revealed significant training effects from within-group comparisons (g = 0.58, five 2-back effects; g = 0.71, two L2 listening span effects), but insignificant difference from between-group comparisons (g = -0.03 , five 2-back effects; g = 0.18, five L2 listening span effects ). More reproducible behavioral research with scientific and consistent designs is needed for a clearer understanding of the relationship between interpreting experience and EFs.

show abstract

Section: Shiftingsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Updating: L2 Listening Spanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The interpreter advantage in executive functions—A systematic review and meta-analysis

Fan

2021

FLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Working Memory and Interpreting Studies

Zheng¹,

Kuang²

2022

The Cambridge Handbook of Working Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter provides a systematic review of studies on working memory (WM) and interpreting published between the 1970s and 2010s, with special attention paid to simultaneous interpreting (SI) and consecutive interpreting (CI), which are the two primary modes of interpreting. Previous research, whether theoretical or empirical in nature, has investigated three major issues: (1) the interpreter's advantage over noninterpreters in WM capacity and executive control; (2) the relationship between overall WM capacity, WM executive control and interpreting performance, and (3) the interaction that takes place between long-term memory and WM to facilitate meaning retrieval from the source language, interlingual reformulation, and message delivery into the target language. Despite repeated attempts to illustrate how WM functions in the processes of SI and CI, however, there is a shortage of comparative studies that elucidate the similarities and differences in the role of WM in the two interpreting modes, in either theoretical or empirical research. This chapter will fill this gap in the research by first reviewing major WM models of interpreting to determine what SI and CI have in common and how they differ in processing routes; secondly by examining relevant empirical evidence that (in)validates such models, and thirdly by proposing new possibilities for research on WM in both SI and CI. By means of a synthesized review and an in-depth comparative analysis, this chapter will shed new light on how WM demand differs across interpreting tasks and fluctuates during the interpreting process, which will in turn contribute to future interpreting research and pedagogy.

show abstract

What does professional experience have to offer?

2021

TCB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the impact of professional experience on the process and product of sight interpreting/translation (SiT). Seventeen experienced interpreters, with at least 150 days’ professional experience, and 18 interpreting students were recruited to conduct three tasks: silent reading, reading aloud, and SiT. All participants had similar interpreter training backgrounds. The data of the SiT task have been reported here, with two experienced interpreters (both AIIC members) assessing the participants’ interpretations on accuracy and style, which includes fluency and other paralinguistic performance. The findings show that professional experience contributed to higher accuracy, although there was no between-group difference in the mean score on style, overall task time, length of the SiT output, and mean fixation duration of each stage of reading. The experienced practitioners exhibited more varied approaches at the beginning of the SiT task, with some biding their time longer than the others before oral production started, but quality was not affected. Moving along, the practitioners showed better language flexibility in that their renditions were faster, steadier, and less disrupted by pauses and the need to read further to maintain the flow of interpretation.

show abstract

An interpreter advantage in executive functions?

Cited by 9 publications

References 66 publications

The interpreter advantage in executive functions—A systematic review and meta-analysis

The interpreter advantage in executive functions—A systematic review and meta-analysis

Working Memory and Interpreting Studies

What does professional experience have to offer?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About