{"title":"口译研究中的工作记忆任务","authors":"Serena Ghiselli","doi":"10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Studies about working memory (WM) and interpreting have used a variety of methods and results are often\n conflicting. There is therefore the need to analyse the cognitive tasks which have been used so far to assess their effectiveness\n in detecting WM performance differences. This paper presents the findings of a meta-analysis that compares the results of\n interpreters and interpreting students (study group) to the results of non-interpreters (control group) in four cognitive tasks\n (reading span, n-back task, listening span and dual tasks). Interpreters show a significant WM advantage of medium size over\n non-interpreters in tasks based on verbal stimuli, but not in tasks based on non-verbal stimuli. In addition, differences are\n larger when there is a wider gap in interpreting expertise between the two groups.","PeriodicalId":313749,"journal":{"name":"Translation, Cognition & Behavior","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Working memory tasks in interpreting studies\",\"authors\":\"Serena Ghiselli\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Studies about working memory (WM) and interpreting have used a variety of methods and results are often\\n conflicting. There is therefore the need to analyse the cognitive tasks which have been used so far to assess their effectiveness\\n in detecting WM performance differences. This paper presents the findings of a meta-analysis that compares the results of\\n interpreters and interpreting students (study group) to the results of non-interpreters (control group) in four cognitive tasks\\n (reading span, n-back task, listening span and dual tasks). Interpreters show a significant WM advantage of medium size over\\n non-interpreters in tasks based on verbal stimuli, but not in tasks based on non-verbal stimuli. In addition, differences are\\n larger when there is a wider gap in interpreting expertise between the two groups.\",\"PeriodicalId\":313749,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translation, Cognition & Behavior\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translation, Cognition & Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translation, Cognition & Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00063.ghi","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Studies about working memory (WM) and interpreting have used a variety of methods and results are often
conflicting. There is therefore the need to analyse the cognitive tasks which have been used so far to assess their effectiveness
in detecting WM performance differences. This paper presents the findings of a meta-analysis that compares the results of
interpreters and interpreting students (study group) to the results of non-interpreters (control group) in four cognitive tasks
(reading span, n-back task, listening span and dual tasks). Interpreters show a significant WM advantage of medium size over
non-interpreters in tasks based on verbal stimuli, but not in tasks based on non-verbal stimuli. In addition, differences are
larger when there is a wider gap in interpreting expertise between the two groups.