MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407930396 · doi:10.5539/ells.v15n1p16

Knowledge Mapping of News Translation Studies: A Bibliometric Analysis

2025· article· en· W4407930396 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wan Rose Eliza Abdul Rahman, Yean Fun Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslation (biology)Computer scienceData scienceInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To gain an in-depth understanding of news translation studies and provide insights for future research directions, this study conducts a bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer and CiteSpace. Based on 255 journal articles from the Web of Science database, covering all records up to December 31, 2023, influential authors, countries, and journals are identified. CiteSpace is used for evolutionary analysis to track the developmental trajectories of keywords, while VOSviewer performs co-occurrence analysis to reveal associations among keywords and research topic concentrations. Additionally, cited references, authors, and journals are explored to deepen the understanding of the theoretical foundations of news translation studies. The results indicate significant growth in news translation research over the past two decades, particularly after 2010, with Robert A. Valdeón emerging as a highly influential scholar. An enhanced interdisciplinary trend is revealed, and the proportion of core authors is lower than Price’s expected 50%, indicating the field is still in its early developmental stage. Furthermore, the application of artificial intelligence and machine translation in current literature remains sparse. The combined results from VOSviewer and CiteSpace enhance comprehension of news translation studies and pave the way for future advancements in both theoretical and practical realms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.106
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.106
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.1900.219
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207