{rfName}
Wh

Indexed in

License and use

Altmetrics

Analysis of institutional authors

Perez Macias, LorenaAuthor

Share

February 22, 2021
Publications
>
Article
No

What Do Translators Think About Post-Editing? : a Mixed-Methods Study of Translators Fears, Worries and Preferences on Machine Translation Post-Editing

Publicated to:TRADUMÀTICA. TRADUCCIÓ I TECNOLOGIES DE LA COMUNICACIÓ I LA COMUNICACIÓ. (18): 11-32 - 2020-12-01 (18), DOI: 10.5565/rev/tradumatica.227

Authors: Perez Macias, Lorena;

Affiliations

‎ Univ Autonoma Madrid, Dept Filol Inglesa, Madrid, Spain - Author

Abstract

Machine translation post-editing is becoming increasingly common in the translation industry. Given this context, it is essential to know how this new process has impacted professional translators in the translation market. Over the last decade, several studies have compiled information on the perspectives of the different agents involved, although those which include translators' opinions are in the minority (OPTIMALE, 2011; Guerberof, 2012; Specia & Torres, 2012; Temizoz, 2013; Gaspari et al., 2015; Rossi & Chevrot, 2019; among others). Given this situation, the aim of this study is to provide a wider general view of what has been analysed to date about the perception professional translators have of post-editing machine translations. It pays particular attention to the case of Spain, providing data on the main fears, worries and preferences in this area of professional translation.

Keywords

Machine translationPerspectivePost-editingProfessional translators

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal TRADUMÀTICA. TRADUCCIÓ I TECNOLOGIES DE LA COMUNICACIÓ I LA COMUNICACIÓ due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency Scopus (SJR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2020, it was in position , thus managing to position itself as a Q2 (Segundo Cuartil), in the category Literature and Literary Theory.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations from Scopus Elsevier, it yields a value for the Field-Weighted Citation Impact from the Scopus agency: 8.75, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-07-18, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 1
  • Scopus: 7

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-07-18:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 31.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 34 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 3.2.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 4 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

There is a significant leadership presence as some of the institution’s authors appear as the first or last signer, detailed as follows: First Author (PEREZ MACIAS, LORENA) .