Genre Misrecognition in Practice:
Bridging the Theory-Method Gap in Iranian Questionnaire Translation
Abstract
Translation of psychometric instruments represents a specialized translation genre where the questionnaire serves as a calibrated stimulus-response tool. Within the framework of Translation Studies, the success of such transfers is measured by functional equivalence and the preservation of metric invariance rather than mere formal correspondence. This study evaluates the methodological approaches to the translation phase in Iranian psychology and education research by analyzing the type and frequency of translation guidelines cited in instrument validation studies. Using a descriptive-analytical design, we examined a corpus of 451 studies authored by Iranian researchers appearing in Iranian psychology and education journals. The findings revealed that only 3.8% of domestic studies explicitly identified a translation protocol. Furthermore, domestic articles remain heavily anchored in Brislin (1970) as their primary guideline, a dated paradigm, favoring back-translation as the principal method of questionnaire transfer and prioritizing mechanical reversibility over holistic, team-based adaptation. This methodological stagnation suggests a deeper conceptual issue: these patterns can be interpreted as evidence of genre misrecognition, as questionnaires are treated primarily as linguistic texts rather than measurement instruments requiring specialized translation and adaptation procedures. We argue that overcoming this gap requires the institutionalization of genre-specific standards: multi-step translation procedures, cultural adaptation, and expert-led adjudication.
Keywords:
Cross-cultural survey translation, Iranian researchers, Psychology and education articles, Questionnaire translation, Questionnaire translation guidelineReferences
Acquadro, C., Conway, K., Hareendran, A., Aaronson, N., & European Regulatory Issues and Quality of Life Assessment (ERIQA) Group (2008). Literature review of methods to translate health-related quality of life questionnaires for use in multinational clinical trials. Value in Health, 11 (3), 509–521. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00292.x
Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25 (24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Behr, D. (2018). Translating questionnaires for cross-national surveys: A description of a genre and its particularities based on the ISO 17100 categorization of translator competences. Translation & Interpreting, 10 (2), 5–20.
Behr, D., & Braun, M. (2023). How does back translation fare against team translation? An experimental case study in the language combination English–German. Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology, 11 (2), 285–315. https://doi.org/10.1093/jssam/smac005
Behr, D., Braun, M., & Dorer, B. (2016). Measurement Instruments in International Surveys. GESIS Survey Guidelines.
Bowden, A., & Fox-Rushby, J. A. (2003). A systematic and critical review of the process of translation and adaptation of generic health-related quality of life measures in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, South America. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 57 (7), 1289–1306. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00503-8
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216.
Chen, H. Y., & Boore, J. R. (2010). Translation and back-translation in qualitative nursing research: methodological review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 19 (1–2), 234–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.02896.x
Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D. (1993). Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46 (12), 1417–1432.
Harkness, J. A. (2003). Questionnaire translation. In J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. Van de Vijver, & P. Ph. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural Survey Methods (pp. 35–56). John Wiley & Sons.
Harkness, J. A., Braun, M., Edwards, B., Johnson, T. P., Lyberg, L., Mohler, P. P., Pennell, B.-E., & Smith, T. W. (Eds.). (2010). Survey methods in multinational, multiregional, and multicultural contexts. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470609927
Harkness, J. A., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Mohler, P. Ph. (Eds.). (2003). Cross-cultural survey methods. John Wiley & Sons.
Heggestad, E. D., Scheaf, D. J., Banks, G. C., Monroe Hausfeld, M., Tonidandel, S., & Williams, E. B. (2019). Scale adaptation in organizational science research: A review and best-practice recommendations. Journal of Management, 45 (6), 2596–2627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319850280
International Test Commission. (2017). The ITC Guidelines for Translating and Adapting Tests (Second edition). https://www.intestcom.org/files/guideline_test_adaptation_2ed.pdf
Jones, P. S., Lee, J. W., Phillips, L. R., Zhang, X. E., & Jaceldo, K. B. (2001). An adaptation of Brislin's translation model for cross-cultural research. Nursing Research, 50 (5), 300–304 https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-200109000-00008
Maneesriwongul, W., & Dixon, J. K. (2004). Instrument translation process: a methods review. Journal of advanced nursing, 48(2), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03185.x
McKenna, S. P., & Doward, L. C. (2005). The translation and cultural adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures. Value in health: the journal of the International Society for Pharmaco-economics and Outcomes Research, 8 (2), 89–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.08203.x
Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. Prentice Hall,
Repke, L., & Dorer, B. (2021). Translate Wisely! An Evaluation of Close and Adaptive Translation Procedures in an Experiment Involving Questionnaire Translation. International Journal of Sociology, 51 (2), 135–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207659.2020.1856541
Sadeghzadeh, M., Nouhi Jadesi, N. Lost in documentation: professional norms and the gaps in survey translation transparency. Research Integrity and Peer Review 11, 8 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-026-00192-4
Sousa, V. D., & Rojjanasrirat, W. (2011). Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 17 (2), 268–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x
Valdez, D., Montenegro, M. S., Crawford, B. L., Turner, R. C., Lo, W. J., & Jozkowski, K. N. (2021). Translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches as a component of health research and practice: A discussion and taxonomy of popular translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches. Social science & medicine (1982), 278, 113931. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113931
van de Vijver, F., & Tanzer, N. K. (2004). Bias and equivalence in cross-cultural assessment: An overview. European Review of Applied Psychology / Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 54 (2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2003.12.004
Wild, D., Grove, A., Martin, M., Eremenco, S., McElroy, S., Verjee-Lorenz, A., & Erikson, P. (2005). Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value in Health, 8 (2), 94–104.
World Health Organization. (2016). Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. WHO.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
DOR
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dr. Nasimeh Nouhi Jadesi, Dr. Marziyeh Sadeghzadeh, Narjes Nasrpour, Fariba Buzarjomehri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright Licensee: Iranian Journal of Translation Studies. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0 license).
