According to Rausch and Wuttke's (2016) model of domain-specific problem-solving competence (see also Rausch et al. 2016; Sembill et al. 2013), cognitive, emotional, and motivational components of competence have to be taken into consideration.
In modeling problem-solving competence, we distinguish four components of competence: (1) knowledge application, (2) metacognition, (3) self-concept, and (4) interest as well as thirteen facets of competence, each of which is assigned to one of the four components.
In this model, strategic competence can be characterized as the mental repertoire for implementing the components of language competence in contextualized communicative language use.
Rantanen, Eriksson, and Nieminen proposed a conceptual model that described the essential components of social competence as social skills, social adjustment, and social performance in examining the relationship between social competence and epilepsy.
By means of this tool, teachers can perform teamwork competence assessment of a group of students taking into account how the individuals acquire the essential components of such competence.
Similarly, Kanfer and Ackerman (2005) consider knowledge, skills and abilities, motivation, personality, and self-concept as components of work competence.
This model yielded the recursive nature of the core processes in relation to different components of strategic competence and its credibility through data triangulation.
Language skills permeated the basic components of career competence – "knowing how," "knowing why," and "knowing whom" – and enabled respondents to cross boundaries.
The aim of this study was to find out whether the emerging processes in GPT grounded model validated the components of strategic competence proposed by Bachman and Palmer (1996).
These main components of strategic competence or metacognitive strategies interact with other areas of language ability (language knowledge), topical knowledge, and affective schemata features of context in which language use takes place.
Orozco and Albir (2002) maintained that these four types of translation problems are chosen based on the rationale that in order to solve them the translator needs to mobilize all the components of translation competence (Orozco and Albir, 2002).
