درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Miscommunication has been reported as a major contributing factor to aviation mishaps. About 70% of the first 28000 reports to NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System were related to communication problems (Sexton, 1999). According to Chaparro and Groff (2002), the most frequent human errors in aircraft maintenance, is supposed to be information misinterpretation. The movement area of an airport is typically the place where a single misunderstanding may have serious and adverse effect on flight safety. Furthermore, Eadie (2000) puts emphasis on conducting research on applied communication related to real phenomena in the real world. Therefore, the current study aims to investigate miscommunication among aviation personnel. To this end, first, a corpus of 31 authentic audio records and reports of aviation mishaps was analyzed based on Grice’s maxims. Consequently, the findings of the study revealed that teaching Grice’s (1975) Maxims needs to be taken into account in verbal communication. The findings of the research have implications for curriculum designers, pilots, and air traffic controllers.

For decades, task-based language teaching has become a commodity in ELT profession and has been the subject of many studies. Yet, there seems to be a paucity of research on the impact of TBLT on enhancing learners’ motivation in learning writing. In this regard, this article presents the results of student’s perceptions of the intervention of TBLT in teaching writing in two English classes for one academic term at one institution in Phnom Penh. The study examined the students’ perceptions regarding the impact of TBLT on their writing behaviors and motivation in learning writing before and after the intervention, as well as the constraints that they encountered during the implementation of TBLT. The results indicate positive-but-varying views regarding this intervention. Some challenges are also detected and suggestions are offered for future research in this area accordingly. The study has implications for EFL writing classrooms.

In the past four decades, the US-Iran relations have been hostile, especially after Donald Trump took office as president in 2017. Since 1979, Washington's official policy toward Iran has been predicated on containment, push-back, and change of behavior. However, Iran usually perceives the US policy regarding itself in terms of regime change or metamorphosis. The United States has countered Iran through coercive diplomacy, crippling sanctions, military blockade, delegitimization, isolation, and demonization. The present paper aims to investigate the antagonism between the two countries in Donald Trump's administration. The main reasons behind Trump's maximum pressure campaign against Iran and Iran’s perception of this attitude constitute the main research questions addressed in this paper. The findings show that the two countries have different understandings of their hostilities. Although the US preference in Trump’s era for Iran was regime change, it would settle for a non-challenging or so-called a normal Iran. But Iran perceived the US policy as undermining its independence, identity, and existence. In fact Iran perceived Trump’s gesture on negotiation or making new deal as just a propaganda show. This paradigmatic different outlooks has blocked diplomacy. The present paper, through a descriptive-analytic method, elaborates on this antinomy mainly from Iranian side.

Since the Islamic Revolution in 1979, Iran has been affected by economic sanctions imposed by Western countries especially the U.S. Since 2006 and with increasing Iranian nuclear standoff with the P5+1 group, the United Nations has frequently imposed economic and financial sanctions against Iran. As a result of these international restrictions and their management by an international organization, Iran's exports have been heavily reduced. Given the sanctions on the oil industry in Iran and the lack of a comprehensive model of export performance of Iranian petroleum products in the sanctions period, this research can help improve and develop this industry in international markets. The research method is phenomenological and the statistical population includes export and marketing managers and oil industry experts. Non-probable sampling and snowball sampling methods were used in this research. In this qualitative study, semistructured in-depth interviews were used to gather information, and 7 in-depth interviews on saturation law were conducted. Structural, internal, interpretive, and descriptive validity were used for validation. For surveying reliability, revision while coding and surveying by another informed person were used to ensure correct coding. This research uses a qualitative study to determine the effect of returning sanctions on the export performance model of Iranian petroleum products. After open, pivotal, and selective coding and the use of Atlas quality software, the background of Iran's oil products export performance in sanctions is market orientation, company resources, marketing mix, macro environment, and items of Iranian oil products export performance in sanction includes: financial performance,customer satisfaction and customer retention in sanction situation. Most of the previous studies have focused onpositivism and quantitative research methodology while we used the qualitative and mixed-method in this research. 

This article seeks to identify and explain the process of securitizing ISIS by the Islamic Republic of Iran. The mostimportant question of this article is: How did the Iranian government manage to portray ISIS as an existential threat to itscitizens and how to involve them in their foreign and military policies against this terrorist group? This article uses thesecuritization theory to explain the Iranian war with ISIS in Syria and Iraq. It aims to consider the process and dynamics ofsecuritization of ISIS in Iranian society which led them to support the military combat with ISIS. The research hypothesis isthat the focus on securitization theory prepares the constant framework for understanding how the Copenhagen notion of security helps the Iranian government to justify the enemy narrative of ISIS through the trend of exclusion, exceptionalities, and use of physical force. Iranian government actively uses the securitization process to make required changes and adjustments for confronting ISIS to gain support and legitimacy from ordinary people. This article considers the role of the audience in the process of decision-making and how rulers use this opportunity to mobilize and organize armed forces. The Iranian government in the process of securitizing ISIS has shown that it can involve the people in the process of decision-making and the implementation of its foreign and military policies.

The depth and extension of Iran’s controversial connections with its proxies have caught eyes and thoughts. While much ink has been spilled to Iran's regional policy, the majority of these analyses, either intuitively or deliberately, build their explanation on the so-called ‘Persian-Shia offensive intentions’. Conversely, the present paper seeks the roots of Iran's regional policy in its specific geography and history. From this perspective, Iran’s regional policy is inseparable from its geopolitical strategies. To shed light on these strategies, the paper begins with the rise of the Persian Achaemenes until the establishment of the Islamic Republic, focusing on major driving forces behind Iran’s regional policy and strategies. The paper elaborates on a foundational concept of ‘strategic loneliness’, as Iran’s permanent feature, by highlighting the country’s curse of geography and its long-standing historical insecurity. In following, it shows the consequential impact of Iran’s strategic loneliness for the country’s non-state foreign policymaking strategic connections with military non-state actors—in the containment of its regional enemies. The paper ultimately argues that while this policy has kept Iran’s national integrity and security while entrapped the country in a durable ‘geopolitical predicament’ and deepened regional crisis in the Middle East.