Introduction This study systematically investigates documentation gaps in survey translation within validation studies conducted by Iranian researchers, framing these gaps as a critical, yet overlooked, research integrity concern. Transparent reporting is foundational not only for methodological rigor but for enabling meaningful peer review and trust in cross-cultural findings. Methods Using a comprehensive framework that assesses documentation across three phases (input, translation process, and output), we analyzed the completeness of reported translation procedures. We further evaluated these practices against established professional standards for translation- specifically, the norms of accountability, communication, and fidelity- which align with core research integrity principles. Results The findings reveal a pronounced and systemic imbalance: while the translation process itself is frequently documented, both preparatory (input) and resultant (output) stages are largely neglected. This selective reporting constitutes a significant transparency deficit, obscuring essential information about translation validity and severely compromising the methodological scrutiny central to peer review. Discussion and conclusion The results directly inform interventions to bolster research integrity, as neglecting thorough documentation creates an unrecoverable information gap for peer reviewers. This prevents proper evaluation of translation validity- a core methodological checkpoint. Therefore, the proposed priorities (e.g., mandatory reporting templates for input briefs and output decisions) are targeted interventions to make the translation process auditable. These gaps systematically exclude evidence of translators' intellectual labor and cultural mediation, eroding the transparency necessary for reproducing or trusting cross-cultural findings. The consistent pattern in Iran, mirroring LMIC (Low- and Middle-Income Country) challenges, confirms that standardizing documentation is a prerequisite for equitable peer review, ensuring that the methodological foundations of cross-cultural research, specifically translation validity, are rendered auditable and subject to effective peer review- a core safeguard of research integrity.

Lost in documentation: professional norms and the gaps in survey translation transparency

期刊论文
出版模式：

开放获取
发表日期：

2026年4月13日

查看全文

Marziyeh Sadeghzadeh,
Nasimeh Nouhi Jadesi

摘要

Introduction

This study systematically investigates documentation gaps in survey translation within validation studies conducted by Iranian researchers, framing these gaps as a critical, yet overlooked, research integrity concern. Transparent reporting is foundational not only for methodological rigor but for enabling meaningful peer review and trust in cross-cultural findings.

Methods

Using a comprehensive framework that assesses documentation across three phases (input, translation process, and output), we analyzed the completeness of reported translation procedures. We further evaluated these practices against established professional standards for translation- specifically, the norms of accountability, communication, and fidelity- which align with core research integrity principles.

Results

The findings reveal a pronounced and systemic imbalance: while the translation process itself is frequently documented, both preparatory (input) and resultant (output) stages are largely neglected. This selective reporting constitutes a significant transparency deficit, obscuring essential information about translation validity and severely compromising the methodological scrutiny central to peer review.

Discussion and conclusion

The results directly inform interventions to bolster research integrity, as neglecting thorough documentation creates an unrecoverable information gap for peer reviewers. This prevents proper evaluation of translation validity- a core methodological checkpoint. Therefore, the proposed priorities (e.g., mandatory reporting templates for input briefs and output decisions) are targeted interventions to make the translation process auditable. These gaps systematically exclude evidence of translators' intellectual labor and cultural mediation, eroding the transparency necessary for reproducing or trusting cross-cultural findings. The consistent pattern in Iran, mirroring LMIC (Low- and Middle-Income Country) challenges, confirms that standardizing documentation is a prerequisite for equitable peer review, ensuring that the methodological foundations of cross-cultural research, specifically translation validity, are rendered auditable and subject to effective peer review- a core safeguard of research integrity.