# Pretest meaning across survey translations

Review time periods, actor meanings and response instructions across survey translations before comparing language groups.

If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate.

## 1. What period does this question ask you to think about?

Answer: ____________________

## 2. Who does the actor named in the question refer to?

Answer: ____________________

## 3. What would you do if the situation did not apply to you?

Answer: ____________________

## 4. Which expression would you explain differently in your own words?

Answer: ____________________

## Author notes / illustrative keys where applicable

1. Detect a changed reference period rather than assuming the translated wording preserves it.
2. Find role meanings that differ across language or organizational context.
3. Verify that skip and not-applicable instructions survive the translation.
4. Invite a paraphrase that exposes ambiguity; ask a competent language reviewer to assess it.

Interpretation caution: An English gloss or back-translation alone does not prove equivalence. The guide does not certify translations or claim automatic product translation.


## Illustrative finding and follow-up

Observation: Synthetic English glosses: source version “within the past seven days”; candidate gloss “recently.” Both look fluent but preserve different boundaries.

Action to test: Have competent language reviewers reconcile the reference period and pilot the native-language questions with appropriate respondents before pooling results.

Follow-up: Retain versioned wording, glosses and native-language pilot notes; check whether the same period and actor are understood after revision.


## Collection protocol

When and whom to ask: Pilot each intended language before collection with volunteers who understand the local context; translate these probes as needed.

Decision owner: The questionnaire owner coordinates competent language reviewers and approves versioned wording.

Follow-up: Recheck period and role interpretation after revision; do not interpret language-group score differences before resolving wording differences.

Response handling: Keep reviewer notes focused on meaning. Avoid collecting immigration status or identifying comments merely to establish language context.


## Worked measurement study

All example records are synthetic; manual worksheet, no automatic import.

### Inspect the synthetic example

Version or requirement | Example wording | Interpretation
--- | --- | ---
Source English wording | Within the past seven days | Explicit period
Candidate English gloss | Recently | Unspecified period
Review requirement | Preserve the intended seven-day meaning | Native-language review and pilot pending

### Derivation

The table shows one concrete semantic mismatch, not a translation-quality score. Both the corrected native text and its respondent interpretation remain to be verified.

Review note: hold cross-language comparisons until the period and actor are reconciled and pretested in the intended languages.

### Evidence boundary

Observed / Different English glosses for the period / Supports a translation question to investigate.
Unknown / Native-language equivalence / Do not label the candidate translation approved.
Next check / Competent review and native-language pilot / Record actual wording versions and interpretation notes.

### Method references

Pew Research Center translation methods: https://www.pewresearch.org/questionnaire-design-and-translation/ — Translation review context.