## 4 Results and Discussions
### Retrospective Self-Reflections
Translation into English generally requires greater focus on the target text, likely due to the linguistic and stylistic challenges of producing fluent English, especially since the interpreters are not native English speakers. In contrast, translating into Chinese demonstrates a more balanced allocation of cognitive resources between the source text and target text, potentially reflecting lower cognitive demands for TT production in this direction. Both directions show an increased focus on the TT as tasks progress, but this trend is more pronounced in C-E translation. This study identified instances of parallel coordination between source text (ST) comprehension and target text (TT) production among translators. Evidence from both the quantitative data and participants' self-reports supports the existence of a strong association between cognitive effort allocation and the type of processing involved. Eye-tracking and keystroke logging results indicated that TT processing consistently accounted for the largest share of cognitive resources. While many participants demonstrated awareness of the differing cognitive demands across processing types, their estimates regarding the distribution of attention units (AUs) often diverged from the empirical findings. When compared to the study's hypotheses, the results show that two of the three proposed hypotheses were fully supported, while the third received partial confirmation. The third hypothesis proposed that \"there are differences between descriptive data and participants' self-reflection. For instance, participants may have a tendency to be unaware of the cognitive resources invested in first-language production during L2-to-L1 translation\". This was partially validated by the findings. Additionally, some participants reported experiencing multitasking, parallel processing, and instances of automatic processing during translation tasks. This study relies on eye-tracking and keylogging data to investigate cognitive resource allocation during translation. While these methods provide valuable insights, they inherently only capture a subset of the complex cognitive and physiological responses involved in the translation process. As a result, certain dimensions of translator cognition, such as emotional regulation and stress, may remain underexplored. Future research could address this limitation by adopting a multimodal methodology, incorporating additional tools such as facial expression analysis, respiratory monitoring, heart rate (HR) tracking, galvanic skin response (GSR), and cue-based Retrospective Think-Aloud (RTA) protocols. Such an integrated approach would allow for a more holistic understanding of the interplay between cognitive and emotional processes during translation tasks. Another limitation lies in the study's exclusive focus on novice translators. While this provides valuable insights into the translation behaviors of this specific cohort, the findings cannot be directly generalized to more experienced or professional translators, whose cognitive strategies and resource allocation may differ significantly. Investigating variations across translator groups with differing levels of expertise and professional backgrounds represents an important avenue for future research. Lastly, this study is constrained by its focus on the English-Chinese language pair. To enhance the broader applicability of the findings, future research could expand to other language pairs or replicate the study with a focus on Chinese-to-English translation. Such comparative studies would provide deeper insights into how language directionality and typological differences influence translation processes.