درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Purpose: With the expansion of technology and its impact on the various aspects of human life, particularly in the field of commerce and exchanges, and with the expansion of competition in the field of international trade, the study of various aspects of electronic commerce as one of the most important effects of this type of business, is inevitable. The present research seeks to answer the main question: "what is the judicial citation of electronic evidence in electronic commerce cases, and what legal and social effects will it have?". Methodology: The present study is a descriptive-analytic (qualitative) one and uses inferential methodology using the researcher's ability to understand the legal scans related to the judicial citation of electronic evidence in electronic commerce cases and also to rely on evidence and facts are used. Findings: Using electronic communications as a means of conducting various types of interaction, such as deals, poses an important topic for e-commerce that due to the features of cyberspace, the clarification of the legal system in electronic commerce cases has a particular importance to the other issues of IT rights in the line with judicial justice. Conclusion: If the process of discovery and access to electronic evidence is carried out in accordance with the legal principles, it can be the basis for issuing the sentence and the rules governing the evidence (law) are also the same for the electronic commerce cases.

Purpose: Theorizing chairs play an important role in improving theories and the position of the university in compared to other universities. Therefore, the present study was conducted with the aim of providing a model of promoting theorizing chairs in universities and higher education centers. Methodology: This research in terms of purpose was applied and in terms of implementation method was mixed (qualitative and quantitative). The research population in the qualitative part was the university experts of the theorizing chairs in Tehran province and in the quantitative part were the faculty members of Tehran province. The research sample in the qualitative part were 17 people who according to the theoretical saturation principle were selected by purposive sampling method and in the quantitative part were 343 people who according to Cochran's formula were selected by multi-stage cluster sampling method. The research instrument in the qualitative part was a semi-structured interview and in the quantitative part was a researcher-made questionnaire (32 items), whose psychometric indices were confirmed. Data were analyzed with using methods of coding in MAXQDA software and exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modeling in SPSS and AMOS software. Findings: The results showed that for the promoting theorizing chairs 32 indicators, 9 components and 3 categories were identified. The leadership factors category were included six components of open-mindedness, rationality, driving force, religious debates, specialized debates and moderation, administrative category were included one component of administrative and university category were included two components of innovation and productivity. Also, the factor load of all components on the relevant categories and categories on the model of promoting theorizing chairs was significant. In addition, the fit indices of the mentioned model indicate the appropriate fit of the model and the component on the relevant categories and the categories on the model of the present study had a significant effect (P <0.05). Conclusion: Considering the approval of the model of promoting theorizing chairs in both qualitative and quantitative parts, planning seems necessary for the implementation of theorizing chairs in universities and higher education centers.