Strategies in Translating Literature Research

Strategies in Translating Literature Research ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL ESSAY PAPERS ON Strategies in Translating Literature Research the paper needs to follow actually the attached rubric. Strategies in Translating Literature Research these are my sources: *there is more attached* http://www.journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/IJCLTS/article/view/3270/2740 http://www.ejournals.eu/pliki/art/6272/ https://journals-sagepub-com.sdl.idm.oclc.org/doi/pdf/10.1177/1043659613493440 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1152242.pdf https://www-tandfonline-com.sdl.idm.oclc.org/doi/pdf/10.1080/10228195.2018.1444080?needAccess=true I attached the outline of the paper the research is basically about strategies that are used in translating literature works. foreignization end domestication with example for each attachment_1 attachment_2 attachment_3 Cross-cultural Instrument Translation and Adaptation: Challenges and Strategies Cross-cultural Instrument Translation and Adaptation: Challenges and Strategies Sutthida Phongphanngam*, Helen W. Lach Abstract: Over the decades, cross-cultural research has been conducted to increase understanding of health and illness phenomena across different cultures and populations. However, researchers are faced with issues of translation from the source language to the target language, even with instruments developed for use in cross-cultural research. Therefore, the process of translation is a crucial one in order to maintain the conceptual, content, semantic, and construct equivalences across the two languages and cultures which is essential for credibility of the measurement results. The purpose of this article is to describe the process of the translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International. It was translated into Thai using ten steps, including translation and back-translation as well as checking with experts and the target audience to assure cultural equivalence. Challenges with some wordings and cultural differences in daily life were identified and addressed with strategies to manage them so that an appropriate version of the tool was developed and ready for future research with community-dwelling Thai older adults. Pacific Rim Int J Nurs Res 2019; 23(2) 170-179 Keywords: Back translation, Cross-cultural, Falls Efficacy Scale, Fear of Falling, Testing, Translation Received 17 June 2018; Accepted 3 October 2018 Introduction Cross-cultural research has dramatically increased due to an interest in understanding health phenomena and/or experience of health and illness across different cultural populations and ethnic groups. Conducting cross-cultural studies has long been recommended as researchers can reference a concept or construct of interest across cultures and directly compare the findings across studies from different cultures and countries.1,2 However, in doing so, researchers must translate instruments from the source language, usually English, to the language of the target population. One 170 Correspondence to: Sutthida Phongphanngam*, RN, PhD, APN Medicalsurgical Nursing, University of Phayao School of Nursing, Thailand. E-mail: [email protected] Helen W. Lach, RN, PhD, CNL, FGSA, FAAN, Professor Saint Louis University School of Nursing, Missouri, USA. E-mail: [email protected] of the goals of instrument translation is to achieve crosscultural conceptual, semantic, and content equivalences for the constructs or concepts of interest.1-4 Without these equivalences, differences and/or similarities in the results gathered from cross-cultural research may be due to errors in translation rather than from cultural differences.5, 6 Even if an instrument was developed for use in cross-cultural research, researchers still face the challenges of instrument translation. For example, Pacific Rim Int J Nurs Res • April – June 2019 Sutthida Phongphanngam and Helen W. Lach forward translators could select wording in target languages that does not have the same meaning as in the original language.7-9 This is because the terms, and meaning of the concept or constructs being studied may differ among languages, cultures, and countries.1, 7-9 Therefore, the process of translation is a crucial one. The comprehensive process of instrument translation should include not only translation of the instrument, but also cultural adaption of each item to the target culture while retaining the meaning and intent of the original items.1, 10-12 The purpose of this article is to discuss cross-cultural instrument translation methods, as well as challenges and strategies encountered during a study to translate the Fall Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I) into Thai. Cross-cultural Instrument Translation Methods There are two kinds of instrument development methods commonly used in cross-cultural research.11 In the first instance, an instrument is developed for use in two languages, with an assumption that neither language is a source language. Strategies in Translating Literature Research The items are modified in an ongoing reciprocal process thereby providing the opportunity to align the two versions closely. In the second example, researchers rather than developing a new instrument, researchers instead use a previously developed and validated instrument and adapt it for use in a target culture and language.11 The latter is more commonly used.8, 11, 13 The simplest method for instrument translation is forward translation from the original to the new language. This method is simple, but can raise questions related to the quality of the translation, thus threatening the validity of the instrument as well as the research findings since the source and the target versions may lack semantic and content equivalences.11, 14 In order to improve equivalences between the source and target languages, Brislin14, 15 recommended cross-cultural researchers add one or more of the following techniques when translating an instrument: (a) use of a bilingual translator to translate the instrument from the source to the target language, (b) use of another bilingual Vol. 23 No. 2 translator back-translation of the instrument, (c) use of bilinguals to test both the source and target language versions, or (d) testing of the translated version with participants of the target population to be studied. Brislin15 developed a process for cross-cultural research that has been adopted by many researchers.16, 17 To begin the process of back translation, someone who is bilingual translates the instrument from the source (original) to the target (local) language. Then, a different person who is bilingual translates the instrument back from the target to the source language. The new back-translated version and the original version are compared for similar words and meaning. Ideally, this is done by a researcher familiar with the instrument and content area. This process can be repeated if needed to improve comparability of the back-translated version to the original version. Each bilingual translator works independently. The last back-translated version must be compare with the original version by a monolingual person whose primary language is the language used in the original version,12, 18 and should be the developer of the original instrument if he or she is available.10, 18 The researcher then compares the last back-translated version with the original version. If an error in meaning is found, the process is repeated again until both versions are equivalent.15 In a recent review of translation process methods used in cross-cultural research, Maneesriwongul and Dixon5 found that the most widely used translation methods were forward-only translation, forward-only translation with testing, back translation, back translation with monolingual testing, back translation with bilingual testing, and back translation with both monolingual and bilingual testing, respectively. They recommended that the standard method for cross-cultural research should include at least one back translation, followed by testing with target language participants. In this study, a rigorous back translation process was used to develop a cross-cultural version of a measure falls self-efficacy, the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I)19 for use with Thai older adults. Strategies in Translating Literature Research The following 171 Cross-cultural Instrument Translation and Adaptation: Challenges and Strategies describes the translation and cross-cultural adaptation using this method, as well as challenges encountered and recommendations for other researchers. The Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I) Fear of falling is increasingly recognized as a significant problem in older adults, leading to activity restriction, disability, and increased risk of falls.20-22 As a result, measurement of fear of falling is common in studies related to falls, frailty, and activity among older adults. Fear of falling is often assessed using the related concept of falls efficacy. Falls efficacy was originally conceived as confidence in performing different daily activities without falling by Tinetti, Richman, & Powell23, who developed the 10-item Falls Efficacy Scale (FES). The FES-I is an adaptation later developed by researchers with the Prevention of Falls Network Europe (ProFaNE) for use in a wide range of cultural settings.19 The FES-I consists of 16 items, including the 10 items from the original FES.23 Six additional items were selected from literature to provide a wider range of more difficult activities based on review of the other measures. The final version of the FES-I assesses concern about the possibility of falling while performing of sixteen common activities.19 Each activity is scored from 1 (not at all concerned) to 4 (very concerned) points, providing a total score ranging from 16 (absence of concern) to 64 (extreme concern). A higher score indicates higher concern. On testing in the United Kingdom, the instrument showed excellent internal consistency and test-retest reliability (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.96, Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) = 0.96).19 A cross-cultural validation of the FES-I indicated positive psychometric properties in Germany (n=94), the Netherlands (n=193), and the United Kingdom (n=178). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were 0.90, 0.96, and 0.97, respectively and the ICCs were 0.79, 0.82, and not available, respectively.24 The FES-I has been translated and has excellent psychometric properties across a variety of languages 172 and countries including, Sweden25, Brazil26, Italy27, Greece28, Spain29, Turkey30, Arabic31, Hungarian32, and Chinese.33 Although the FES-I has been adapted for several countries, a translation use in Thailand had not been posted by the ProFaNE group. While the FES-I was translated into Thai language before34, the researcher reported using the term “fear of falling” instead of “concern of falling” in her questionnaire, as required by the ProFaNE group. The word “fear” had created issues in past testing of measures of fear of falling. As a result, the purpose of this study was to translate the FES-I into a culturally appropriate Thai language version based on the ProFaNE guideline and process for use in future fear of falling research. Methods After the first author (SP) received permission from the ProFaNE group, the process of translation and cultural adaption of the FES-I was conducted according to their ten-step translation protocol.35 This translation protocol was congruent with the translation process recommended by Brislin.4, 15 The English version provided the original language. The process for translation and cross-cultural adaptation follows. Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation Process Before beginning, the authors selected translators. The authors carefully discussed the selection because one of the keys of successful translation in crosscultural research is translator qualification.4 According to the literature review, forward translators from the source to the target language should be conducted by persons fluent in both languages and cultures.16, 17, 36 Ideally, they have different backgrounds, are knowledgeable about and familiar with the construct or concept being measured, and know how the instrument will be used. Conversely, back translators should be blinded to the original instrument being translated and should be unaware of the intent and the concept or context being studied. Strategies in Translating Literature Research All translators Pacific Rim Int J Nurs Res • April – June 2019 Sutthida Phongphanngam and Helen W. Lach should work independently.2-4, 6, 16, 36 If possible, and the translator team should include translators who speak different variations or dialects of the same language.3 After consulting the literature review and the ten-step translation protocol of the FES-I, five bilingual translators were selected, including three forward translators and two back translators. Since the FES-I was developed to be suitable for translation for use in a variety of cultural contexts and languages, the English wording contained in the FES-I was not sophisticated. Hence, three bilinguals Thai doctoral students studying in the United States who were native Thai speakers with different backgrounds (one specializing in psychiatric nursing, and two in adult and older adult nursing), and were familiar with the concept of fear of falling were selected. The two back translators were also bilingual: one had English as a first language, and the other had Thai as a first language. One of two back translators was a professional translator of Thai nationality. She was born, grew up, and earned her education through a doctoral degree in the United States. Although her native language was English, she can read and write in Thai since she used Thai language in her home and had worked in Thailand. The other back translator was a retired Thai older adult living in the United States. She spent the first half of her life in Thailand, and then earned her master’s and doctoral degrees and worked in the United States. Next, the instructions for translators37 were provided to the three forward translators in order to enhance conceptual, semantic, and content equivalences between the FES-I and the FES-I (Thai) versions.2, 18 Then, they independently translated the original FES-I into Thai language. In the second step, a first meeting of forward translators was held in order to identify differences and discrepancies between the three translated versions, and to solve any problems through discussion and consensus. These steps yielded a provisional FES-I (Thai) version. As a first step in evaluating this version, each forward translator Vol. 23 No. 2 selected two Thai older adults living in the United States to evaluate the provisional FES-I (Thai) version. Each older adult filled out the provisional version separately. The forward translators then asked the older adults about the clarity, comprehensibility, appropriateness, and comprehensiveness of each item in the provisional version. Then, the forward translators met again in order to discuss and modify the wording of the provisional version based on the older adults’ feedback. This step resulted in a second provisional version. In the next step, the second provisional version was back translated by two back translators who were blinded to the original FES-I, and were not aware of the intent or the concept and context of fear of falling. A third meeting of the forward translators was then held to review both back-translation versions. The discrepancies between the translated versions were evaluated and noted. As an additional step, all three English versions (the original and the two backtranslated versions) were examined by another author (HL). She is an expert in the area of fear of falling and monolingual in English. Any inconsistencies were identified, discussed with the back translators, and a consensus reached by the authors. Then, the pre-final FES-I (Thai) version was established. The pre-final FES-I (Thai) version was reviewed by six monolingual Thai community-dwelling older adults living in Thailand, the target population for future studies. The purpose was to examine the clarity and linguistic appropriateness of the pre-final FES-I (Thai) version, and to ensure that future participants could comprehend all the questions and procedure for administration. Because the authors were not in Thailand at the time, the first author (SP) contacted a nurse working in a community hospital who worked with Thai older adults who agreed to administer the FES-I (Thai) version. Strategies in Translating Literature Research The nurse was oriented to the project, and worked with an older adults’ club in her community to find older adults to volunteer to fill out a questionnaire and discuss it. They independently reviewed and filled out the 173 Cross-cultural Instrument Translation and Adaptation: Challenges and Strategies questionnaire. Afterwards, she asked them about the clarity of each item and identified any words or phrases that they did not understand, were difficult to comprehend, or inappropriate. Results While the translation process worked well, there were some challenges encountered during the project that were solved. During the first step, the forward translators had some difficulty finding an appropriate match for some English words in the Thai language. For example, they noted that the word “concerned” was translated into three different Thai words. One translator used a Thai word with a meaning close to “worried,” even though all translators were provided the FES-I direction that the term “concerned” should be used to express a cognitive uneasiness about the possibility of falling, rather than emotional distress that would be expressed in terms of “worried”, “anxious”, or “fearful.” This problem was solved during their consensus meeting. Another item was modified by a consensus among the forward translators due to differences in Thai culture: “taking a bath or shower.” This was translated into Thai as “taking a bath.” The Thai rarely have a bathtub in their homes, so bathing is typically done by taking a shower. After the first meeting, there were no other changes to items or words apart from those mentioned, and the provisional version of the FES-I (Thai) version was created. This provisional version was reviewed with six Thai older adults living in the United States. Then a second meeting of the forward translators was held to discuss their comments. None of the participants in this initial group reported a problem with any item in the provisional version or gave any suggestions; thus, the first provisional version was not revised. When the back-translated English versions were reviewed and compared to the original, the wording of one item appeared awkward in English. The original 174 item, “walking up and down a slope” appeared as “walking up and down the steep or ramp” in the back-translated version. The back translator was contacted. She explained that the terms “steep or ramp” meant a slope, but she used these other words because they were more appropriate and familiar terms in the Thai language and context than the word “slope.” Therefore, after discussion with the forward translators, their wording was retained since it used was determined to have a meaning closer to the original English version. Therefore, the authors concluded that although the original FES-I and one of the back-translated versions was a bit different in linguistic equivalence, the three English versions revealed semantic and content equivalence since the meaning was maintained. A pre-final FES-I (Thai) version was developed. The pre-final FES-I (Thai) version was reviewed by six Thai community-dwelling older adults living in a Thai rural area. After completing the questionnaire, the older adults were asked “What do you think this questionnaire asks?” They all answered that the questionnaire asked about their concern about the possibility of falling when doing each activity. While participants reported that the items were clear and understandable, they also preferred to have the questions administered by interview, rather than filling out the questionnaires themselves. This is because they were confused about which column they should check to answer each question. When the nurse compared the answers on the questionnaire to the older adults’ verbal answers, she found that the older adults did not always check the correct column. For example, one person answered that she was very concerned, but she checked the “not concerned” column. Other than this suggestion, no words or items were reworded or modified, and the final FES-I (Thai) version was created. Discussion In this study, the FES-I was translated and adapted into Thai context in t … Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10