认知负荷和翻译焦虑对译者行为机制的影响研究

doi:10.12002/j.bisu.626

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

译者行为研究重视对“翻译外”因素的研究，这体现了其以人为本的理念。在诸多“翻译外”因素中，译者心理因素与译者行为紧密相关。本文聚焦翻译焦虑这一心理因素，采用主观评估的方式测量复杂任务与简单任务所引发的认知负荷差异，并分阶段（即准备、转换和修订阶段）考察其对不同焦虑水平的学生译者认知资源分配行为与译文质量的影响。研究发现，相较于简单任务，复杂任务在高、低焦虑组中均引发了更高的认知负荷。此外，认知负荷与翻译焦虑均显著影响译者的认知资源分配行为，且这种影响因翻译阶段而异；认知资源分配行为与译文质量的关系也因认知负荷和翻译阶段而异。本文凸显了分阶段考察译者行为以及译者行为与译文质量之间关系的必要性，以期为深化翻译过程研究及译者行为研究提供一些启示。

关键词: 译者行为; 认知负荷; 翻译焦虑; 认知资源分配; 译文质量; 翻译阶段

Abstract:

Within studies of translator behavior, research focusing on extra-translation factors has emphasized human-centeredness. Among these factors, psychological factors are closely linked to translator behavior. Taking translation anxiety as a key extra-translation factor, this study used student translators’ subjective ratings to compare the cognitive load elicited by simple and complex tasks. It then examined, across translation phases, how cognitive load and translation anxiety affected student translators’ cognitive resource allocation and translation quality. The results showed that the complex task elicited a higher cognitive load than the simple task in both the high- and low-anxiety groups. Both cognitive load and translation anxiety significantly affected cognitive resource allocation, with effects varying across translation phases. Moreover, the association between cognitive resource allocation and translation quality varied across cognitive load conditions and translation phases. Overall, these findings highlight the necessity of phase-based analyses that integrate process and product data in studies of translator behavior and have implications for future research.

Keywords: translator behavior; cognitive load; translation anxiety; cognitive resource allocation; translation quality; translation phases

中图分类号:

H059

王湘玲, 周祥艳, 陈广姣. 认知负荷和翻译焦虑对译者行为机制的影响研究[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2026, 48(1): 33-47.

Wang Xiangling, Zhou Xiangyan, Chen Guangjiao. Effects of Cognitive Load and Translation Anxiety on Translator Behavior[J]. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2026, 48(1): 33-47.

图/表 5

参考文献 50

[1]	ABOLHASANI H, GOLPARVAR S E & ROBATJAZI M A. Modelling the role of L2 writing anxiety in graph-based composing performance and strategy use[J]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 2022(2):417-435.
[2]	BREEDVELD H. Translation processes in time[J]. Target, 2002(2):221-240.
[3]	CAO Lu, DOHERTY S & LEE J F. The process and product of translation revision: Empirical data from student translators using eye tracking and screen recording[J]. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 2023(4):548-565.
[4]	CHARLTON S G. Measurement of cognitive states in test and evaluation[C]//CHARLTON S G & O’BRIEN T G. Handbook of Human Factors Testing and Evaluation. 2^nd Ed. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum,2002:97-126.
[5]	CHEN Fang, ZHOU Jianlong, WANG Yang, et al. Robust Multimodal Cognitive Load Measurement[M].Cham: Springer, 2016.
[6]	DRAGSTED B & CARL M. Towards a classification of translation styles based on eye-tracking and keylogging data[J]. Journal of Writing Research, 2013(1):133-158.
[7]	FUKUTA J & YAMASHITA J, Effects of cognitive demands on attention orientation in L2 oral production[J]. System, 2015, 53:1-12.
[8]	GÜVENDIR E & UZUN K. L2 writing anxiety, working memory, and task complexity in L2 written performance[J/OL]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2023,60:101016[2024-03-28]. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSLW.2023.101016.
[9]	JÄÄSKELÄINEN R. Quality and translation process research[C]// MARTÍN R M. Reembedding Translation Process Research. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company,2016:89-106.
[10]	KELLY D. Text selection for developing translator competence[C]//SCHÄFFNER C & ADAB B J. Developing Translation Competence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company,2000:157-170.
[11]	LIU Yanmei& ZHENG Binghan. Comparability of difficulty levels of translation tasks in CET-6 parallel test forms: Evidence from product and process-based data[J]. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 2022(4):428-447.
[12]	LIU Yanmei, ZHENG Binghan & ZHOU Hao. Measuring the difficulty of text translation: The combination of text-focused and translator-oriented approaches[J]. Target, 2019(1):125-149.
[13]	MELLINGER C D & HANSON T A. Order effects in the translation process[J]. Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 2018(1):1-20.
[14]	MOGHADDAS M & KHOSHSALIGHEH M. Implementing project-based learning in a Persian translation class: A mixed-methods study[J]. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 2019(2):190-209.
[15]	PLASS J L, MORENO R & BRÜNKEN R. Cognitive Load Theory[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
[16]	QASSEM M. Adequacy, fluency and cognitive processes: Evidence from translating English news articles into Arabic[J]. Interactive Learning Environments, 2024(5):2249-2264.
[17]	RAFFETY B D, SMITH R E & PTACEK J T. Facilitating and debilitating trait anxiety, situational anxiety, and coping with an anticipated stressor: A process analysis[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997(4):892-906.
[18]	SEUFERT T. The interplay between self-regulation in learning and cognitive load[J]. Educational Research Review, 2018, 24:116-129.
[19]	SHREVE G M, LACRUZ I & ANGELONE E. Cognitive effort, syntactic disruption, and visual interference in a sight translation task[C]//ANGELONE E & SHREVE G M. Translation and Cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company,2010:63-84.
[20]	SKEHAN P. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
[21]	SUN Sanjun, LI Tian & ZHOU Xiaoyan. Effects of thinking aloud on cognitive effort in translation[J]. Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies, 2020, 19:132-151.
[22]	SUN Sanjun & SHREVE G M. Measuring translation difficulty: An empirical study[J]. Target, 2014(1):98-127.
[23]	SWELLER J. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning[J]. Cognitive Science, 1988(2):257-285.
[24]	SWELLER J, AYRES P & KALYUGA S. Cognitive Load Theory[M]. New York: Springer, 2011.
[25]	SWELLER J, VAN MERRIENBOER J J G & PASS F. Cognitive architecture and instructional design[J]. Educational Psychology Review, 1998(3):251-296.
[26]	SWELLER J, VAN MERRIËNBOER J J G & PAAS F. Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later[J]. Educational Psychology Review, 2019(2):261-292.
[27]	TRACE J, JANSSEN G & MEIER V. Measuring the impact of rater negotiation in writing performance assessment[J]. Language Testing, 2017(1):3-22.
[28]	WADDINGTON C. Different methods of evaluating student translations: The question of validity[J]. Meta, 2001(2):311-325.
[29]	WANG Fuxiang. Impact of translation difficulty and working memory capacity on processing of translation units: Evidence from Chinese-to-English translation[J]. Perspectives, 2022(2):306-322.
[30]	WENG Yu, ZHENG Binghan & DONG Yanping. Time pressure in translation: Psychological and physiological measures[J]. Target, 2022(4):602-627.
[31]	XU Ting Sophia, ZHANG Lawrence Jun & GAFFNEY J S. Examining the relative effects of task complexity and cognitive demands on students’ writing in a second language[J]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2022(2):483-506.
[32]	YAN Jackie Xiu & WANG Honghua. Second language writing anxiety and translation[J]. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 2012(2):171-194.
[33]	YILDIZ M. How do translation students’ cognitive efforts vary? — An answer in consideration of pauses[J]. Journal of Education and Practice, 2020(2):48-55.
[34]	ZHANG Sumin & REN Yuhong. The mediating role of a Xu-argument based iterative translation continuation task in the dynamic relationships between translation learning anxiety and foreign language learning proficiency and translation strategies[J/OL]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2022,13:916597[2024-03-28]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.916597.
[35]	ZHOU Xiangyan, WANG Xiangling & LIU Xiaodong. The impact of task complexity and translating self-efficacy belief on students’ translation performance: Evidence from process and product data[J/OL]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2022,13:911850[2024-03-28]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.911850.
[36]	陈朗, 李婧, 孙毅. 基于认知组构的译后审校能力模型及其实证研究[J]. 上海翻译, 2022(1):40-46.
[37]	胡显耀. 翻译社会认知研究的概念、问题和方法——译者行为研究的新途径[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2023(4):37-50.
[38]	黄鹂鸣. 基于文献计量的国外译者行为相关研究考察——兼与我国译者行为研究对比[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2024(4):116-132.
[39]	马冬梅. 周领顺译者行为研究思想的系统性发展[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2024(6):64-86.
[40]	莫梓, 曾曙静. 译者元认知监控、思辨倾向和翻译能力的关系研究[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2023(6):94-109.
[41]	庞莉, 卢植. 翻译过程的认知负荷研究:现状与展望[J]. 中国科技翻译, 2019(4):38-40,19.
[42]	苏雯超, 李德凤. 认知视角下的译者行为特征研究[J]. 中国外语, 2022(4):91-96.
[43]	王律, 王湘玲. 不同译语方向中译者认知资源分配研究[J]. 外国语, 2021(6):113-121.
[44]	王湘玲, 沙璐. 翻译问题解决能力培养实证研究——基于探究共同体模式[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2023(2):93-105,146-147.
[45]	许钧, 周领顺. 推动译者行为研究向纵深发展[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2025(1):1-10.
[46]	周领顺. 译者行为研究的人本性[J]. 外语研究, 2022(2):78-83.
[47]	周领顺. 译者行为评价系统的学理性[J]. 外语导刊, 2024a(1):106-114,160.
[48]	周领顺. 译者行为批评中的“翻译外”研究——兼作翻译内外分析框架与“文本 - 行为 - 社会”三位一体评价系统的比较[J]. 中国外语, 2024b(5):106-112.
[49]	周领顺. 译者行为研究“文本-行为-社会”三位一体系统[J]. 外国语文, 2025a(1):105-113.
[50]	周领顺. 再论译者行为研究中的“翻译外”研究[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2025b(2):31-42.

任务序号	实验文本	实词多义性	整体关联词频次（每1000词出现次数）	任务复杂度
1	文本1	4.690	19.230	简单
2	文本2	5.960	12.200	复杂

任务序号	实验文本	实词多义性	整体关联词频次（每1000词出现次数）	任务复杂度
1	文本1	4.690	19.230	简单
2	文本2	5.960	12.200	复杂

评分项目	评分标准
准确度（总分10分）	原文信息的准确传达：译文是否准确传达了原文信息；译文中是否存在漏译、增译或误译等
流利度（总分10分）	目标语言的表达质量：译文是否流畅自然、符合目标语言的语法和表达习惯；译文中是否存在搭配、语法或拼写等方面的错误

评分项目	评分标准
准确度（总分10分）	原文信息的准确传达：译文是否准确传达了原文信息；译文中是否存在漏译、增译或误译等
流利度（总分10分）	目标语言的表达质量：译文是否流畅自然、符合目标语言的语法和表达习惯；译文中是否存在搭配、语法或拼写等方面的错误

固定效应	准备阶段	转换阶段	修订阶段
认知负荷	t = -0.071，p = 0.943	t = -9.461，p < 0.001	t = 2.242，p < 0.050
翻译焦虑	t = -0.077，p = 0.939	t = -0.197，p = 0.844	t = 2.048，p < 0.050
认知负荷×翻译焦虑	t = -0.722，p = 0.471	t = -0.425，p = 0.671	t = -1.079，p = 0.283