Although the idea of expertise was first introduced into Interpreting Studies by Barbara Moser-Mercer in 1997, many of the first researchers establishing the field compared the performance of experts and novices, Tiselius (2013) refers to for example Goldman-Eisler (1972). Stachowiak-Szymczak (2019, pp. 59–69) quotes Moser-Mercer et al. (2000, p. 107), according to whom it takes developing an ability to incorporate sub-competences or sub-skills of interpreting to become a professional interpreter or an expert. Cognitive approaches to interpreting have studied expertise in interpreting (Tiselius, 2015), which has close links with competence. However, researchers agree that competence is only part of expertise, and that not all competent interpreters are experts. Research into expertise in interpreting, more precisely the comparison of the different aspects of the performance of experts and novices, has focused on simultaneous interpreting.

The concept of expertise has been developed in cognitive psychology (Tiselius, 2013), and Tiselius defines an expert as an “individual who has acquired great knowledge in a given field and who can make use of this knowledge to outperform other performers” (Tiselius, 2013, p. 30). She then quotes Ericsson for a definition of expertise, which is seen as the “characteristics, skills and knowledge that distinguish experts from novices and less experienced people” (Ericsson, 2007, p. 3, quoted in Tiselius, 2013, p. 30). According to Stachowiak-Szymczak (2019, pp. 59–69), interpreting expertise might be conceptualized as a combination of knowledge, skills and strategies that develop in interpreters through training and work experience. She also stresses that the ability to interpret, together with the strategies that reduce cognitive load, may develop over time and experience in interpreting. These definitions seem to be rather vague, however, it should be noted that the definition of expertise by Ericsson has a lot in common with the definition of interpreter competence by Albl-Mikasa (see section 2): “a general term for everything an interpreter needs to know, and be able to do to perform a professional task” (Albl-Mikasa, 2013, p. 19). In her model, Albl-Mikasa also lists skills and knowledge that constitute interpreter competence. The difference between the constructs of expertise and interpreter competence seems to lie in the difference between experts and novices, and experts outperforming others.

Below, a summary is given of the results related to expertise in interpreting. This summary is based on Tiselius (2013) and Stachowiak-Szymczak (2019), both of whom have provided a detailed overview of the results related to differences between experts and novices in interpreting, based on work by Barik (1973, 1975), Goldman-Eisler (1972), Liu (2008), Liu and colleagues (2004), and Moser-Mercer and colleagues (2000).

Results indicate the following differences between experts and novices.

Declarative knowledge is predominantly factual information, whereas procedural knowledge is knowing how to perform different skills (Salaberry, 2018), while declarative memory is a memory store of facts and events, elements of which can be consciously recalled, whereas procedural memory is memory related to performing automatized skills and tasks (Bajo and Padilla, 2015). In other words, there is a shift from declarative to procedural knowledge and memory in the development of interpreting competence.