The whole picture: Processing of numbers and their context in simultaneous interpreting

Abstract

This paper presents an eye-tracking study in which number processing in simultaneous interpreting was investigated. Interpreting accuracy and eye behaviour were studied together to unveil the processing and rendering of numbers by interpreting trainees (N = 22) and professional interpreters (N = 26). While professional interpreters rendered numerals and the context in which they appeared with better accuracy, there was also a positive correlation between number interpreting accuracy and context interpreting accuracy. Our results indicate that interpreting arithmetic values of numerals is more cognitively demanding than interpreting their context, which is reflected in longer mean fixation duration on numbers than on the elements they referred to. Further research is needed to investigate numerical data processing in other tasks, involving other language pairs and interpreting directionality. The study outcomes may be a useful contribution to research on the cognitive aspects of simultaneous interpreting, numerical data processing, as well as interpreter training.

Eye-Tracking in Interpreting Studies: A Review of Four Decades of Empirical Studies

“…In light of this situation, it will be most potent when data obtained is crosschecked and supplemented by those yielded from other methods. Therefore, Korpal and Stachowiak-Szymczak's (2018) study would have been more convincing if results from eye-tracking on cognitive load were confirmed by other methods, such as stimulated recall (Seeber, 2013). In summary, in order to strengthen validity, multiple eye-tracking measures need to be triangulated with other online measures such as ERP, or off-line measures, such as questionnaires, interpreting product analysis, and stimulated recall.…”

What does professional experience have to offer?

“…In general, expert interpreters produce more accurate output, and converging evidence points to experts' strategic competences and efficient allocation of attention resources to, and effective switching between, different sub-tasks during interpreting (see aslo Stachowiak-Szymczak 2018 andKorpal 2019 on shorter mean fixation durations by professional interpreters). By contrast, research on experts' cognitive advantages is inconsistent, with some studies rejecting their superiority in language proficiency (Moser-Mercer et al 2000) or WM capacity (Köpke & Nespoulous 2006;Liu et al 2004) and others confirming the lead (for more discussion see Liu 2009;Sunnari & Hild 2010;Tiselius & Hild 2017), while still others present partial advantages (see Nour et al 2020).…”

Table_1.XLSX

“…In the case of eye tracking interpreting research reviewed here, some studies were found to draw a conclusion with a single method of eye-tracking, or a single measure from it. For instance, Korpal and Stachowiak-Szymczak (2018) used mean fixation duration as the sole indicator of cognitive effort. Fixation duration is indeed seen as indicative of cognitive effort (Rayner, 1998;Holmqvist et al, 2011), the use of a single measure, however, is likely to raise doubt on the research results, especially when eye-tracking can yield rich data from a wide array of measures, some of which are also indices of cognitive load, such as fixation count and pupil size.…”

“…Fixation duration is indeed seen as indicative of cognitive effort (Rayner, 1998;Holmqvist et al, 2011), the use of a single measure, however, is likely to raise doubt on the research results, especially when eye-tracking can yield rich data from a wide array of measures, some of which are also indices of cognitive load, such as fixation count and pupil size. In addition, Korpal and Stachowiak-Szymczak (2018) used the single method of eye-tracking to extrapolate cognitive load on participants. However, this method has its share of weaknesses despite various merits.…”

“…For instance, Ma et al 's (2021) study showed that global cognitive load seemed to be significantly affected by syntactic asymmetry between English and Chinese, as much longer dwell times and more fixations were observed in STR of such structures. In another study, Korpal and Stachowiak-Szymczak (2018) reported that simultaneous interpreting of numbers was more cognitively taxing than interpreting of their context, indicated by longer mean fixation duration for numbers. Interpreting strategy is another recurring topic that keeps intriguing researchers.…”