Item Details

Machine translation implementation among language service providers in Spain: A mixed methods study

Issue: Vol 3 No. 1 (2016) Mixed Methods

Journal: Journal of Research Design and Statistics in Linguistics and Communication Science

Subject Areas: Linguistics

DOI: 10.1558/jrds.30331


This article presents a mixed methods study on the implementation of machine translation (MT) and post-editing (PE) among Spanish language service providers and the methodology used. In the first phase, questionnaires were used to collect quantitative data about each business’s profile and the proportion of businesses using MT and PE. In the next phase, a focus group session was used to collect qualitative data to complement the quantitative results and understand businesses’ motivations and the procedures followed to adopt (or not adopt) an MT system. The results of the two phases are presented separately and then integrated in the discussion. The quantitative results show that 47.3% of Spanish language service providers use MT and that 45.5% of these use MT in only 10% of their total projects. The qualitative results reveal that the decision to implement an MT system depends on multiple factors: the business’s financial capacity, technological capacity and the knowledge and attitude of the business’s human resources.

Author: Marisa Presas, Pilar Cid-Leal, Olga Torres-Hostench

View Original Web Page

References :

ACT. (2005). Estudio de mercado de la traducción en España: 2004. Las Rozas; Barcelona: ACT.

Almutawa, F. and Izwaini, S. (2015). Machine Translation in the Arab World: Saudi Arabia as a case study. Trans-Kom. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift Für Translation Und Kommunikation, 8 (2): 382–414. Retrieved on 7 January 2016 from

Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research 6 (1): 97–113. Retrieved on 7 January 2016 from

Burns, A., Kim, M. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2009). Doctoral work in translation studies as an interdisciplinary mutual learning process: How a translator, teacher and educator and linguistic typologist worked together. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 3 (1): 107–218. Retrieved on 22 December 2015 from

Chan, S. (2015). The Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Technology. London: Routledge.

Christensen, T. P. and Schjoldager, A. (2016). Computer-aided translation tools – the uptake and use by Danish translation service providers. The Journal of Specialised Translation – JoSTrans – (25): 89–105. Retrieved on 15 January 2016 from

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA, London, New Delhi: SAGE.

Creswell, J. W. and Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. 

DePalma, D. A., Hegde, V., Pielmeier, H. and Stewart, R. G. (2014). The Language Services Market 2014. Cambridge, MA: Common Sense Advisory.

Díaz de Rada, V. (2012). Ventajas e inconvenientes de la encuesta por internet. Papers, 97 (1): 193–223. Retrieved on 22 October 2015 from

Doherty, S. (2012). Investigating the Effects of Controlled Language on the Reading and Comprehension of Machine Translated Texts: A Mixed-methods Approach. Dublin City University. Dublin. Retrieved on 15 November 2015 from

Doherty, S. and Kenny, D. (2014). The design and evaluation of a Statistical Machine Translation syllabus for translation students. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer, 8 (2): 295–315. Retrieved on 4 January 2016 from

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J. and Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11 (3): 255–274. Retrieved on 4 January 2016 from

Joscelyne, A. and Brace, C. (2010). Postediting in Practice: A TAUS Report. Retrieved on 15 November 2015 from

Kelle, U. and Erzberger, C. (2010). Qualitative und quantitative Methoden: kein Gegensatz. In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff and I. Steinke (Eds), Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch, 299–309. Reinbek: Rowohlts Enzyklopädie.

Koehn, P., Hoang, H., Birch, A. and Callison-Burch, C. (2007). Moses: Open Source Toolkit for Statistical Machine Translation. Proceedings of the ACL 2007, Prague June 2007 (pp. 177–180). Retrieved on 20 July 2016 from

Koehn, P. (2010). Statistical Machine Translation. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kreuter, F., Presser, S. and Tourangeau, R. (2008). Social Desirability Bias in CATI, IVR, and Web Surveys: The effects of mode and question sensibility. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72 (5): 847–865. Retrieved on 7 January 2016 from

Kuznik, A., Hurtado Albir, A., Espinal, A. and Berenguer, M. A. (2010). The use of social surveys in translation studies: methodological characteristics. MonTI. Monografías de Traducción E Interpretación, 2: 1–20. Retrieved on 7 January 2016 from

Libro Blanco de la traducción y la interpretación institucional. (2011). Madrid: Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores y de Cooperación. Retrieved on 10 November 2015 from

Libro blanco de la traducción editorial en España. (2010). Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura; ACE Traductores. Retrieved on 10 November 2015 from

Moorkens, J. (2015). Consistency in Translation Memory Corpora: A mixed methods case study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 9 (1): 31–50. Retrieved on 6 February 2016 from

Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. Newbury Park: Sage. (Qualitative research Methods; 16).

Morse, J. M. and Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed Method Design: Principles and Procedures. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast. (Developing qualitative inquiry).

Rinsche, A. and Portera-Zanotti, N. (2009). The Size of the Language Industry in the EU. European Comission (Studies on translation and multilingualism). Retrieved on 18 January 2016 from

Rossman, G. B. and Wilson, B. L. (1985) Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review 9 (5): 627–643.

Sutskever, I., Vinyals, O. and Le, Q. (2014). Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networks. In Z. Ghahramani, M. Welling, C. Cortes, N. D. Lawrence and K. Q. Weinberger. (Eds) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27, NIPS 2014, 1–9. Retrieved on 20 July 2016 from

Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA, London, New Delhi: SAGE.

Torres-Domínguez, R. (2012). Translation Technologies Survey Results. MozGorilla. Retrieved on 3 January 2016 from

Torres-Hostench, O., Presas, M. and Cid-Leal (coords.). (2016). El uso de la traducción automática y la posedición en las empresas de servicios lingüísticos españolas: Informe de investigación ProjecTA 2015. Bellaterra. Retrieved on 20 June 2016 from

Trad Online. (2011). Translation Business and Translators: Translation Industry Survey 2010–2011: What’s new since 2008? Paris. Retrieved on 14 January 2016 from

Van der Meer, J. and Ruopp, A. (2014). MT Market Report 2014. Retrieved on 14 January 2016 from

VITAE: Estudio de viabilidad para la implantación de la traducción automática en la empresa. (2015). Retrieved on 15 November 2015 from

Zaretskaya, A., Corpas Pastor, G. and Seghiri Domínguez, M. (2015). Translators’ requirements for translation technologies: A user survey. In G. Corpas Pastor, M. Seghiri Domínguez, R. Gutiérrez Florido and M. Urbano Mendaña (Eds), AIETI7: Nuevos horizontes en los Estudios de Traducción e Interpretación, 247–254). Ginebra: Tradulex. Retrieved on 14 January 2016 from