2024/11/07 by Hugh Wilson Nettelbeck · 1 citation
Arts and Humanities · Medicine · #Clinical practice guidelines implementation #Subtitles and Audiovisual Media #linguistics and terminology studies
paper · doi:10.1080/0907676x.2024.2421773
openalex publication_date 2024/11/07 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Despite comprehensive descriptions of norms in the literature, rapid evolution of subtitling practices often renders these outdated, and empirical investigation remains limited. This narrative scoping review aimed to provide a snapshot of current practice by investigating the consistency of English interlingual subtitling guidelines from four media providers (Netflix, Disney, TED Conferences, and Channel 4) and how these compare to academic prescriptions for practice. It also explored the extent to which current norms are supported by empirical evidence. Results compared instructions from media providers with academic recommendations and empirical research data in six key areas: (1) subtitle speed; (2) duration; (3) length; (4) segmentation; (5) position; and (6) appearance (color, font). Results indicated current guidelines are largely consistent across providers and allow faster speeds and longer lengths than previous norms. Additionally, results indicated subtitling norms have generally been proposed with little empirical justification, and empirical research conducted thus far has had limited generalizability. Going forward, a strong evidentiary basis for subtitling practices should be established to avoid unjustified restrictions on decision-making and to strengthen the professionalization of subtitling. Future research should explore impacts of various subtitling guidelines on audience comprehension and enjoyment to ensure that practices remain relevant and effective.