1. Introduction

Speaking is recognized as a critical skill across all languages, with its importance in daily communication being approximately twice that of reading and writing (Rivers, 2018). Individuals are typically identified primarily as speakers rather than readers or writers, positioning speaking as potentially the most critical of the four main language skills (Ur, 1996). For many learners worldwide, the ultimate objective of acquiring a new language is to attain proficiency in speaking (McCarthy, 1998). Nevertheless, the levels of success among language learners vary significantly. Recent research has begun to focus on individual differences and self-perception to explain this variance. A pivotal theoretical framework relevant to this inquiry is the notion of self-efficacy, introduced by Bandura (1986) as individuals' judgments of their abilities to systematically arrange and implement the necessary actions to achieve specific performance outcomes. This belief in self-efficacy pertains to a learner's capability to accomplish academic tasks at a defined level. Extensive interdisciplinary research studies have demonstrated that elevated levels of self-efficacy correlate with enhanced performance across various language learning tasks (Bavaqar, 2019; Farjami & Amerian, 2013; Liu, 2013; Mills et al., 2006, 2007; Rahimi & Abedini, 2009; Shirkhani & Mir Mohammad Meigouni, 2019). However, a thorough review of existing literature indicates that limited examinations have been conducted on the factors that foster and enhance language learners’ self-efficacy, particularly in speaking. Specifically, no studies have explored the impact of translation on improving learners' speaking self-efficacy. Hence, the current study sought to explore the correlation between translation skills and speaking self-efficacy among advanced EFL learners in Iran. To accomplish this goal, the researcher analyzed Jakobson's (2012) triadic categories of translation—specifically intralingual and interlingual translation—to address the following research question:

What is the relationship between intra-/interlingual translation and Iranian advanced EFL learners' speaking self-efficacy?

2. Literature Review

2.1. Self-Efficacy in Speaking Skills

From a psychological standpoint, self-efficacy is essential in comprehending achievement behaviors. Self‐efficacy denotes an individual's belief in their capability to organize and execute behaviors effectively in particular situations (Schunk, 1984). Self-efficacy is a fundamental aspect of self-concept, influencing how individuals perceive their personal capabilities (Williams & Burden, 1997). The notion of self-efficacy was first introduced by Bandura (1986), who articulated it as individuals' judgments of their abilities to systematically arrange and implement the necessary actions to achieve specific performance outcomes (p. 391). As claimed by Bandura (1986), self-efficacy is defined as an individual's ability regarding their capacity to carry out a particular academic task at a designated level of proficiency. It is noteworthy to mention that even if students possess the requisite skills to complete a task, their ability to manifest those skills is contingent upon their belief in their own capabilities. Bandura further elucidates that experiencing success in a particular task significantly bolsters an individual's self-efficacy. Within the context of this research, self-efficacy in speaking is specifically concerned with learners' perceptions of their capability to communicate competently in the target language.

According to Bandura (1997), beliefs in self-efficacy are derived from four primary sources: mastery experience, vicarious experience, social persuasion, and psychological states. Mastery experience highlights the importance of past experiences in shaping self-efficacy beliefs.  Individuals who have successfully completed a task tend to possess a heightened sense of self-efficacy. Therefore, to enhance speaking self-efficacy among learners, speaking instructors should initially provide tasks that are manageable and do not demand excessive effort, thereby increasing the probability of learners succeeding in these tasks. This approach can positively influence their self-efficacy regarding speaking skills. Vicarious experience occurs when learners observe the achievements of their friends and peers, which enables them to assess their own abilities in comparison to the accomplishments of others. Witnessing peers excel in a task can foster positive perceptions about one's own abilities, contributing to an increase in self-efficacy. Consequently, instructors should encourage learners to remain attentive during speaking classes and motivate them to observe their classmates' speaking performances, thereby enhancing their self-efficacy in speaking. The third source of influence, social persuasion, pertains to the initiation of tasks, the effort invested in achieving success, and the adoption of new strategies. In EFL classrooms, the feedback and evaluation provided by the teacher can serve as either positive or negative forms of persuasion. It is crucial for speaking instructors to deliver constructive feedback to learners, as this can significantly bolster their self-efficacy. Ultimately, psychological and affective states, including excitement, anxiety, fear reactions, fatigue, and stress can also impact self-efficacy. Research indicates that learners who experience lower levels of stress and anxiety are more likely to complete tasks successfully. Accordingly, it is essential to transform debilitating states into facilitating ones, as this is a critical factor in enhancing perceived self-efficacy beliefs. Given that learners in speaking classes can face various negative affective influences such as shyness, stress, and anxiety, instructors should strive to cultivate a supportive and relaxed classroom environment to foster improved self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997).

Bandura's proposal has been extensively utilized by numerous researchers to examine how various factors influence the enhancement of speaking self-efficacy among EFL learners. Notably, several studies have identified self-efficacy as an outstanding predictor of academic achievement (Doordinejad & Afshar, 2014; Hsieh & Schallert, 2008; Rahimpour & Nariman-Jahan, 2010) and proficiency in language tasks and language skills (Raoofi et al., 2012). Some researchers (e.g., Kargar & Zamanian, 2014; Naseri & Zaferanieh, 2012) have established a positive correlation between achievements in reading comprehension and self-efficacy beliefs. Chen (2007) further elucidated the positive relationship between achievement in listening comprehension and self-efficacy, while Rahimi and Abedini (2009) demonstrated that self-efficacy in listening comprehension notably correlates with actual listening proficiency. However, the exploration of the relationship between achievement in speaking and speaking self-efficacy beliefs remains relatively scarce. Saeidi and Ebrahimi Farshchi (2012) in a study investigated the impact of teaching communication strategies on the self-efficacy of Iranian EFL students in speaking within content-based courses, concluding that such instruction positively influences students' self-efficacy in speaking.

One of the limited studies addressing speaking self-efficacy was conducted by Liu (2013), who explored the impacts of a campus English Bar on the speaking self-efficacy of college students. The findings indicated that students who constantly engaged in English conversation at the Bar exhibited a significantly higher level of self-efficacy in their speaking abilities compared to those who infrequently or never participated in such activities.

2.2. Use of Translation in Foreign Language Teaching (FLT)

Over the last thirty years, the paradigms of language teaching and learning have evolved significantly, transitioning from a complete dismissal of translation, the use of first language (L1), to a notable revival of its application in educational environments (Cook, 2010; Hall & Cook, 2012). Historically, the use of L1 was prominent during the Grammar-Translation Method's dominance; subsequently, the Direct Method, emerging at the end of the nineteenth century, prohibited the use of the mother tongue. Nevertheless, the acceptance of L1 re-emerged with methodologies such as the Silent Way, Suggestopedia, and Community Language Learning before communicative approaches largely rejected it for various reasons (Cook, 2010). As Laviosa (2014) notes, there has been a recent focus among translation instructors and researchers on the relationship between language teaching and translation. The incorporation of translation, which involves learners using their L1 to acquire a new language (Kerr, 2014), has long been a prevalent technique in English as a foreign language (EFL) classrooms. However, the efficacy of this method for facilitating language learning remains a subject of debate (Brown, 2000). Currently, numerous EFL instructors employ translation as a traditional pedagogical approach, playing a crucial role in the educational process by providing "equivalents" in students' mother tongue, thus facilitating a deeper understanding of the target language's syntax and lexis (Sanatifar & Jalalian, 2019). This method is regarded as a valid and favorable model of language teaching, serving as a practical shortcut, particularly in the teaching of grammar and vocabulary (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).

A comprehensive review of research conducted over the past three decades, both within and outside of Iran, regarding the role of translation in language teaching and learning, reveals a generally favorable perspective among EFL teachers toward the integration of translation into language development practices (e.g., Carreres, 2006; Husain, 1994; Kern, 1994; Liao, 2006; Malmkjær, 1998; Mogahed, 2011; Naynava & Sanatifar, 2018; Newmark, 1991; Omura, 1996; Owen, 2003; Siregar, 2020; Yüzlü & Atay, 2020). Notably, Naynava and Sanatifar (2018) found that advanced Iranian EFL learners who engaged with interlingual translation exhibited superior performance compared to those who participated in intralingual translation or did not engage in translation activities at all. An experimental study conducted by Yüzlü and Atay (2020) further demonstrated the significant impact of L1 utilization on the speaking abilities of EFL students. Their results underscored that L1 usage is instrumental in enhancing students' speaking skills, as it mitigates cognitive load and fosters a stress-free learning environment conducive to oral language improvement. Additionally, Siregar (2020) conducted an experiment elucidating the beneficial role of translation activities in foreign language acquisition. His findings indicated that such activities enhance learners’ capabilities in reading, writing, speaking, vocabulary comprehension, grammar understanding, as well as idiomatic expressions. Siregar advocates for a greater emphasis on translation in teaching practices to facilitate improvements in learners' speaking skills.

In a small-scale investigation examining the impact of interlingual subtitles and intralingual subtitles on vocabulary acquisition among intermediate Brazilian EFL learners, Matielo et al. (2013) noted distinct differences between the control and experimental groups. They highlighted a trend indicating the immediate effects of intralingual subtitles on vocabulary enhancement in comparison to both interlingual subtitles and control conditions. Through a comprehensive review of studies conducted over the past two decades concerning language domains, Matielo et al. (2015) recognized emerging research trends within the interplay of second language acquisition (SLA), subtitling, and captioning. Their focus encompassed word recognition, second language (L2) vocabulary acquisition, and L2 reading and listening comprehension. Notably, however, the authors devoted relatively little attention to the domain of L2 grammar acquisition.

Zarei and Rashvand (2011) explored the impact of both verbatim and non-verbatim interlingual subtitles and intralingual subtitles on the comprehension and production of vocabulary in L2 learners. Their findings indicated that non-verbatim subtitles enhanced vocabulary comprehension, irrespective of whether they were interlingual or intralingual. Conversely, intralingual subtitles were found to be more effective for vocabulary production, regardless of the verbatim or non-verbatim nature. In a related study, Rathert and Cabaroğlu (2020) examined the potential impact of bilingual practice on learners' self-efficacy. Their analysis revealed that only five out of twenty-five students exhibited significant changes in self-efficacy perceptions related to speaking and writing. Through interviews, the researchers noted that shifts in self-efficacy were only partially linked to the implementation of bilingual activities, with adverse course conditions largely undermining any potential positive effects of such practices. Similarly, Mohammadi (2017) conducted an investigation with pre-intermediate and intermediate language learners, demonstrating that translation as a communicative activity played a significant role in enhancing speaking performance. This effectiveness was evident in the interactions between teachers and learners during task completion. However, concerning the influence of various types of translation, such as intralingual and interlingual translation, there appears to be a scarcity of research available to date.

3. Method

3.1. Interlingual and Intralingual Translation

To explore the relationship between translation and speaking skills, Jakobson's (2012) classifications of interlingual and intralingual translation were employed. He articulates these two translation types as follows:

1. Intralingual translation (rewording) involves interpreting verbal signs through alternative signs within the same language. This form of translation occurs monolingually, wherein a verbal sign (word) from a specific language is substituted with another sign (word) from the same language.
2. Interlingual translation (translation proper) refers to the interpretation of verbal signs through different languages. This form of translation occurs bilingually, wherein a verbal sign from one language is replaced by a sign from another language.

3.2. Participants

A total of 45 female advanced EFL learners were chosen through random sampling. These participants were enrolled at Majd English Language Academy in Sanandaj City, Kurdistan, Iran. Following an assessment of their homogeneity in English language proficiency, the participants were organized into three groups of 15 individuals each, which comprised one control group (CG) and two experimental groups (EG1 and EG2). Among the participants, 23 were native Kurdish speakers, while 22 were native Persian speakers, with ages ranging from 26 to 50 years (mean age = 33.1).

3.3. Instruments

The Oxford Placement Test (OPT) standard version was administered to assess the homogeneity of the learners. The OPT contains 60 multiple-choice questions, each requiring the test taker to select the most appropriate answer to complete a given item. The highest possible score on the test is 60. All participants were allotted 30 minutes to complete the test under consistent testing conditions. According to the established scoring criteria, individuals who achieved scores in the range of 41-60 were classified as advanced learners. Additionally, speaking self-efficacy was evaluated using a questionnaire developed and validated by Asakereh and Dehghannezhad (2015) (see Appendix A). This instrument included 28 items measured on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5).

3.4. Materials

The assessment of learners' speaking proficiency utilized a set of 10 advanced speaking tasks derived from the Passages/2 textbook authored by Richards and Sandy (2008). This textbook represents the final installment in the Passages series, which is published by Cambridge University Press and is specifically designed for advanced English learners. Within the text, the four essential language skills are integrated through a variety of themes and topics, incorporating thought-provoking discussions and advanced vocabulary.

3.5. Procedure

The methodology employed in this study was genuinely experimental, incorporating one CG and two experimental groups. The participants in the experimental groups underwent treatment that involved learning a language through both interlingual and intralingual translation, while the CG engaged in language learning without the use of translation methods. The experimentation proceeded through several distinct phases:

1. Utilizing the OPT, an analysis of participants' scores in grammar, vocabulary, and reading comprehension was conducted to ensure uniformity in proficiency levels. From this analysis, 45 advanced learners were selected for the study.
2. A speaking self-efficacy questionnaire was administered as a pre-test. Participants were briefed on the aims of the research, with assurances that their personal information would be kept confidential. There was no stipulated time limit for the questionnaire; however, the majority of participants completed it in approximately 20 minutes.
3. In this study, participants were allocated randomly to one CG and two experimental groups. Prior to the commencement of session 1, all groups completed a speaking self-efficacy questionnaire, in which they were asked to provide ratings. The teacher guided the learners through a series of 10 advanced speaking tasks across 10 seventy-five-minute sessions, dedicating one task to each session. In EG1, each session began with the teacher asking the students to close their books, refocusing their attention on the topics at hand, followed by an engaging debate. Subsequently, the learners were instructed to reopen their books, during which the teacher explained the tasks, highlighted useful expressions and vocabulary, and read these items aloud. They then engaged in pair and group activities to practice their speaking skills, culminating in a class-wide sharing of ideas. The teacher provided assistance with any vocabulary-related inquiries, facilitated the identification of challenging words and phrases, and conducted intralingual translation—translating terms into English. EG2 followed a similar treatment procedure throughout the 10 sessions, with the key distinction being that the teacher translated problematic words and phrases into the learners' mother tongue, specifically Kurdish or Persian, thereby employing interlingual translation. In the CG, the learners engaged with and completed the advanced speaking tasks in accordance with the provided instructions during all 10 sessions, without the incorporation of either intralingual or interlingual translations. Following the completion of session 10, the same self-efficacy questionnaire was administered to the learners as a post-test, whereupon they were asked to rate their responses.
4. Following the treatments, the same speaking self-efficacy questionnaire was re-administered to participants to assess the effects on their speaking self-efficacy, with results analyzed and compared using ANOVA in SPSS.
5. Results

4.1. Pre-Test Results

Prior to the application of any treatment, descriptive statistics were employed to measure the mean and standard deviation of the scores across the three groups:

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics for Speaking Self-Efficacy Pre-Test

The preliminary analysis was conducted to confirm that the assumptions of normality were not violated, specifically examining skewness and kurtosis, which fell within the range of +2 to -2 for the variable in question. In EG1, the mean score for speaking self-efficacy was recorded at 72.3, with a standard deviation of 9.2. For EG2, the mean score increased to 76.8, accompanied by a standard deviation of 5.7. Conversely, the CG demonstrated a mean score of 73.4 and a standard deviation of 10 (see Table 1).

Table 2

Test of Homogeneity of Variances for Speaking Self-Efficacy Pre-Test

Table 2 indicates that the assumption of homogeneity of variance remains intact, as the significance value (Sig.) obtained from Levene's test is .08, which exceeds the threshold of .05.

Table 3

ANOVA for Speaking Self-Efficacy Pre-Test

A one-way ANOVA was conducted to assess the differences in speaking self-efficacy among the three groups. The analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in speaking self-efficacy scores at the p<.05 level, with a significance value of .34, which exceeds .05 [F (2, 42) = 1.07, p<.05].

4.2. Post-Test Results

After the treatment, descriptive statistics were used to measure the mean and standard deviation of the scores of the three groups:

Table 4

Descriptive Statistics for Speaking Self-Efficacy Post-Test

The initial analysis was conducted to ascertain that the assumptions of normality were not violated, indicated by skewness and kurtosis values falling within the range of +2 to -2 for the variable in question. The mean score for speaking self-efficacy in EG1 was found to be 90.53, with a standard deviation of 7.68. In EG2, the mean score for speaking self-efficacy was 99.73, and the standard deviation was 11.30. Meanwhile, the CG exhibited a mean score of 73.53, accompanied by a standard deviation of 10.33 (see Table 4).

Table 5

Test of Homogeneity of Variances for Speaking Self-Efficacy Post-Test

Table 5 indicates that the assumption of homogeneity of variance remains intact, as evidenced by Levene's test, which yields a significance value (Sig.) of .16, exceeding the threshold of .05.

Table 6

ANOVA for Speaking Self-Efficacy Post-Test

The one-way ANOVA analysis revealed a significant difference among the three groups, with a p-value less than .05. The speaking self-efficacy scores showed a notable difference, indicated by a significance value of .00, well below the threshold of .05 [F (2, 42) = 27.06, p<.05].

In terms of mean scores, learners in EG2 achieved an average of 99.73, followed by EG1 with 90.53, and the CG at 73.53, demonstrating that EG2 learners excelled compared to the other groups (EG2 > EG1 > CG). Figure 1 illustrates these findings.

Figure 1

Means of Speaking Self-Efficacy Post-Test

Table 7

Multiple Comparisons for Speaking Self-Efficacy Post-Test

As illustrated in Table 7, post hoc comparisons conducted using the Tukey HSD test revealed significant differences in the mean scores among the learners in the three groups. The presence of asterisks (*) adjacent to the reported values indicates that the mean scores for the experimental groups, EG1 and EG2, as well as the CG, were significantly different from one another.

5. Discussion

The findings of the study revealed that intralingual translation exhibited a weaker association with learners' speaking self-efficacy in comparison to interlingual translation. Nonetheless, it demonstrated a marginally more positive correlation with the CG. Moreover, the results indicated a significant positive correlation between interlingual translation and the speaking self-efficacy of learners. Specifically, the advanced Iranian EFL learners who engaged in interlingual translation during the experimental phase (EG2) demonstrated superior performance compared to those who participated in intralingual translation activities (EG1) and those who received no translation support (CG). This suggests that translating into the learners' L1 —Persian or Kurdish in this context— was a more effective treatment approach than intralingual translation (paraphrasing in English) or the absence of translation entirely.

The researcher proposes that one plausible explanation for the established relationship between intralingual and interlingual types of translation and speaking self-efficacy lies in the intricate nature of speaking as a skill that necessitates deliberate development. This enhancement is most effectively achieved through classroom practice involving activities such as translation, which foster interaction among learners. Such interaction not only contributes to the engagement of learners but also serves to bolster their speaking self-efficacy in the EFL context. Further, the cognitive demands associated with translation as an intelligent activity—requiring creative problem-solving within diverse textual, social, and cultural frameworks—suggest that it often involves a conscious level of engagement. Consequently, this makes translation a valuable pedagogical strategy within FLT, especially when both learners and teachers share a common native language. Additionally, it may be argued that the utilization of the L1 during interlingual translation can alleviate cognitive load, thereby creating a less stressful learning environment conducive to the enhancement of speaking skill self-efficacy in L2.

The findings of this experiment largely corroborate the results of prior research studies. Beginning with Bandura's (1997) sources of self-efficacy development, it is noteworthy that interlingual translation may serve as both the first source (mastery experience) and the fourth source (psychological and affective states). Regarding mastery experience, Bandura indicates that previous experiences significantly influence the formation of self-efficacy beliefs. Individuals who have successfully completed a task often exhibit elevated levels of self-efficacy. When applied to the present study, translation into learners' L1 —identified as interlingual translation— may be viewed as a form of past 'experience' and achievement. Therefore, instructors can integrate translation into speaking tasks to enhance learners' speaking self-efficacy. Utilizing interlingual translation, which does not demand extensive effort, can exert a positive influence, thereby fostering improvements in speaking skills and related self-efficacy.

Bandura (1997) posits that affective and psychological states, including excitement, anxiety, fear reactions, fatigue, and stress can significantly impact self-efficacy. For example, learners who experience lower levels of stress and anxiety typically demonstrate more successful task performance. Consequently, the transformation of debilitative states into facilitative states emerges as a crucial factor in enhancing perceived self-efficacy beliefs. In the context of this study, utilizing learners' L1 through interlingual translation serves as an important strategy to mitigate these debilitative states. Given that students in speaking classes often face various negative affective factors such as shyness, stress, and anxiety, it is imperative for instructors to foster a relaxed atmosphere, facilitated by (interlingual) translation, to support the enhancement of learners' self-efficacy beliefs.

The findings of this study offer partial corroboration of the findings from Zarei and Rashvand (2011), which indicated that intralingual subtitles facilitated vocabulary production more effectively. Conversely, the results diverge from those reported by Rathert and Cabaroğlu (2020), who concluded that the impact of bilingual practice on self-efficacy in speaking and writing was not substantial, with only 5 out of 25 students exhibiting significant changes in self-efficacy perceptions, characterized by a moderate effect size. These inconsistencies may be attributed to various factors, including the types of materials and testing methods employed, the mode of translation, the specific language skills or components analyzed, the size of the sample, the design of the study, or variations in participants' proficiency levels.

The findings of this study regarding the influence of translation on various skills and components of language, as well as on the language development of EFL learners, are consistent with the conclusions of numerous previously reviewed studies. Notably, this study supports the assertions made by Cook (2010), Hall and Cook (2012), Laviosa (2014), Kerr (2014), and Heltai (2016) concerning the beneficial role of translation in language learning and teaching (TILT). Furthermore, the results align with the research conducted by Naynava and Sanatifar (2018), which established a positive correlation between inter- and intralingual translation and the speaking fluency of advanced Iranian EFL learners. Additionally, the findings corroborate the experimental work of Yüzlü and Atay (2020), which investigated the impact of L1 utilization on EFL learners' L2 speaking abilities, concluding that L1 use significantly enhanced students' L2 speaking skills. Moreover, the results are in agreement with the study by Mohammadi (2017), which demonstrated that translation, as a communicative activity, played a crucial role in the speaking performance of learners.

6. Conclusion

Based on the preceding experiment and ensuing discussion, the researcher concludes that within the Iranian EFL context, specifically among female advanced EFL learners, interlingual translation serves as an effective communicative activity. This method enhances the interaction between teachers and learners, subsequently aiding in the improvement of learners’ speaking self-efficacy. When employed systematically and purposefully within language instruction and integrated into regular classroom activities, interlingual translation emerges as a valuable tool for language teaching and learning. The researcher emphasizes that a crucial factor in FLT is to facilitate and motivate learners' use of interlingual translation as a means to bolster their speaking self-efficacy. The researcher advocates for a revival of 'translation' in EFL classrooms, akin to traditional methodologies such as the Grammar-Translation Method, where presentations and exercises were grounded in translation tasks (see Sanatifar & Jalalian, 2019). However, this approach should now prioritize 'tasks' and the integration of translation activities designed to enhance speaking self-efficacy. To facilitate their growth, learners are encouraged to actively participate in speaking tasks and engage with both teachers and peers, fostering their speaking self-efficacy. Adopting a positive outlook toward translation will serve as a beneficial strategy in facilitating SLA. EFL teachers should prioritize creating a relaxed atmosphere for teaching speaking. By connecting the lessons to students' personal experiences, including their L1, they can boost learners' confidence in their speaking abilities. It is essential for teachers to foster motivation and ensure that students feel comfortable expressing themselves without the pressure of stress.

The present study's findings were accompanied by certain limitations that may have influenced the outcomes. Consequently, caution is warranted when generalizing these results to other analogous EFL contexts. Among the identified (de)limitations were: the participant pool, consisting solely of Iranian EFL learners from Majd English Language Academy in Sanandaj City, Kurdistan, Iran; the limited sample size of 45 learners; the potential discrepancy between the EFL learners' responses and their actual proficiency levels; and the neglect of variables such as age and gender of the EFL learners within this study.

This study explored how both interlingual and intralingual translation influence speaking self-efficacy. Future research could investigate different types of translation and their effects on speaking self-efficacy in various learner demographics, including considerations of gender, age, number, and attitudes, to enhance generalizability. Additionally, examining the relationship between interlingual and intralingual translation and other language skills —such as listening, reading, writing skills, vocabulary, and grammar —would provide valuable insights.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) certify/certifies that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in the present research paper.